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

2008 Supreme(P&H) 2182

K.KANNAN
Devinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
Rambha Devi – Respondent


Judgment

K. Kannan, J.

1. The driver and owner of the vehicle, who had been burdened with the award, exonerating the insurance company are the appellants before this court. The justification for relieving the insurer was that the driver did not have an effective driving licence on the date of accident but had renewed the same subsequent to the date of accident.

2. At the trial, the Tribunal found that the official from the R. T. O. had produced a document showing that driving licence had expired on 16.5.1996, whereas the accident had taken place on 23.2.1997. The Tribunal had adverted to the fact that the official had also deposed in his evidence that it was possible that the driving licence could have been renewed in some other Division of the R. T. O.

3. The appellants who are driver and owner of the vehicle had filed CM. No.1173-CII of 2003 before this court stating that licence had been actually renewed but it was not filed before the court. The copy of the renewed driving licence had been filed showing that it had been renewed up to 14.5.2005. However, the application had been dismissed by this court on 23.1.2003, stating that the licence appended to the application was totally



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