Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

M/S United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Mansa Ram Father Of Ganga Ram And Others on 15 July, 2010

Author: K. Kannan

Bench: K. Kannan

FAO No.2087 of 1995                             -1-

 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH

                             FAO No.2087 of 1995
                             Date of Decision. 15.07.2010


M/s United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Chandigarh through Sh. S.K.
Bansal, Dy. Manager duly constituted attorney/authorized person.
                                               .........Appellant
                               Versus

Mansa Ram father of Ganga Ram and others
                                                .......Respondents

Present: Mr. Raj Kumar Bashamboo, Advocate
         for the appellant.

         None for the respondents.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

1.  Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
    judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
                               -.-
K. KANNAN J.(ORAL)

1. The insurance company is in appeal challenging the award passed against it without providing even a right of recovery against the owner in a case where a goods carriage, which is transport vehicle was driven by a person, who held a licence without transport vehicle endorsement as set down under Section 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Tribunal passed the award on the ground that a truck could also be a motor car and there was nothing to show that it was a heavy motor vehicle. The endorsement for transport vehicle is for a vehicle, which is a goods carriage. Admittedly, the truck was a goods carriage and therefore, a special endorsement was necessary. The insurance company ought to have been, therefore, FAO No.2087 of 1995 -2- permitted the right of recovery against the owner for a clear breach of terms of the policy by entrusting the vehicle to a driver, who did not have an effective driving licence.

2. The appeal is allowed to that extent of providing for the insurer a right of recovery.

(K. KANNAN) JUDGE July 15, 2010 Pankaj*