SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(Del) 1001

S.N.KAPUR
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
POONAM – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.C.DAVID, K.D.SAINI, Nilam Arora, Pankaj Seth

S. N. Kapoor

( 1 ) IN this cage, the short question relates to whether on the date of accident while driving Tempo No. HYJ - 1166, the driver Anil Kumar was having a valid driving licence. This offending vehicle is a tempo Tata 407 which was being used for transporting goods.

( 2 ) THERE is no dispute in between the parties to the effect that licence No. 37988/rsd issued to Anil Kumar on 13/09/1993 for driving a scooter/motor cycle/car/jeep. This fact was proved by Vijender Singh, clerk from Licensing authority, Rohtak who verified the licence. This fact is also supported by RW-1, Mr. R. K. Bahl, AO of National Insurance Co. There is also no dispute about the fact that an endorsement was made on this driving licence for driving Light Transport Vehicle (hereinafter referred to as ltv for short) as well on 30/07/1996 vide Ex. RW-1/3.

( 3 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellant/insurance Company submits that this driving licence could not be used for driving the vehicle in question.

( 4 ) SECTION 10 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter called the Act for short) before its amendment which came into force on 1/07/1989 reads as under :

"form and contents of licences to drive - (1)










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top