Back
RAJNISH KUMAR
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Lucknow – Appellant
Versus
Chhedana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Rajnish Kumar, J.)
Heard, Shri Anurodh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Vinay Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the claimant-respondent No. 1. None appeared on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 despite sufficient service and served personally.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company submits that the vehicle involved in the accident as alleged was DLIV-5126 but the Insurance Company had insured the vehicle No. DL1V-5126 and it was admitted by the owner, who appeared before the Tribunal. He further submits that the owner had also pleaded that his vehicle was in the workshop on the date of accident i.e. 24.9.2013 and it was proved by appearing himself and producing the owner of the workshop Mohd.Haseeb, but the said evidence has been discarded on the ground that in the criminal case charge-sheet has been filed, whereas the evidence and material of the criminal case could not have been considered to discard the evidence adduced before the trial Court without proof. He further submits that the vehicle was not having the permit on the date of accident i.e. 24.9.2013 as per copies of the permit filed by him, but the learned tribunal has
The absence of a valid permit for a vehicle involved in an accident absolves the Insurance Company from liability for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act.
The insurance company must prove any breach of policy conditions to avoid liability for compensation claims.
Point of law: vehicle which did not have permit to ply on the road which fact cannot but be heid to be in violation of policy conditions. The contention that the owner should not be made liable even ....
The Insurer cannot evade liability for compensation due to permit violations that do not constitute a fundamental statutory infraction.
The court established that a vehicle must have a valid permit and meet specific criteria to be classified as an ambulance for insurance liability purposes.
In negligence claims under the Motor Vehicles Act, the standard of proof is based on preponderance of probabilities; insurers cannot avoid liability for permit breaches if the vehicle was used in an ....
Liability of the insurance company in case of violation of R.T.O. rules and breach of permit conditions
The burden of proof lies on the party asserting a fact, and adverse inference cannot be drawn without evidence.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
