Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(iii). The offending vehicle in question was given only temporary registration certificate which is valid for the period from 30.06.2015 to 29.07.2015 i.e. for a period of one month. Before the temporary registration expired, the vehicle is to be registered before the RTA, West Godavari, Eluru. The date of accident is

02.08.2015 i.e. beyond / more than one month after the temporary registration. Therefore, the vehicle should not have been plied on the road without registration. Hence, there is violation.

12. In Narinder Singh [Narinder Singh v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., (2014) 9 SCC 324 : (2014) 5 SCC (Civ) 43], the claim was in the context of an accident, involving a vehicle, the temporary registration of which had expired. This Court held that the insurer was not liable, and observed that : (SCC p. 328, paras 11-12) "11. A bare perusal of Section 39 shows that no person shall drive the motor vehicle in any public place without any valid registration granted by the registering authority in accordance with the provisions of the Act. However, according to Section 43, the owner of the vehicle may apply to the registering authority for temporary registration and a temporary registration mark. If such temporary registration is granted by the authority, the same shall be valid only for a period not exceeding one month. The proviso to Section 43 clarified that the period of one month may be extended for such a further period by the registering authority only in a case where a temporary registration is granted in respect of chassis to which body has not been attached and the same is detained in a workshop beyond the said period of one month for being fitted with a body or unforeseen circumstances beyond the control of the owner.
12. Indisputably, a temporary registration was granted in respect of the vehicle in question, which had expired on 11-1-

2006 and the alleged accident took place on 2-2-2006 when the vehicle was without any registration. Nothing has been brought on record by the appellant to show that before or after 11-1-2006, when the period of temporary registration expired, the appellant, owner of the vehicle, either applied for permanent registration as contemplated under Section 39 of the Act or made any application for extension of period as temporary registration on the ground of some special reasons. In our view, therefore, using a vehicle on the public road without any registration is not only an offence punishable under Section 192 of the Motor Vehicles Act but also a fundamental breach of the terms and conditions of policy contract."

14. In the present case, the temporary registration of the respondent's vehicle had expired on 28-7-2011. Not only was the vehicle driven, but also taken to another city, where it was stationed overnight in a place other than the respondent's premises. There is nothing on record to suggest that the respondent had applied for registration or that he was awaiting registration. In these circumstances, the ratio of Narinder Singh [Narinder Singh v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., (2014) 9 SCC 324 : (2014) 5 SCC (Civ) 43] applies, in the opinion of this Court. That Narinder Singh [Narinder Singh v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., (2014) 9 SCC 324 : (2014) 5 SCC (Civ) 43] was in the context of an accident, is immaterial. Despite this, the respondent plied his vehicle and took it to Jodhpur, where the theft took place. It is of no consequence, that the car was not plying on the road, when it was stolen; the material fact is that concededly, it was driven to the place from where it was stolen, after the expiry of temporary registration. But for its theft, the respondent would have driven back the vehicle. What is important is this Court's opinion of the law, that when an insurable incident that potentially results in liability occurs, there should be no fundamental breach of the conditions contained in the contract of insurance. Therefore, on the date of theft, the vehicle had been driven/used without a valid registration, amounting to a clear violation of Sections 39 and 192 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. This results in a fundamental breach of the terms and conditions of the policy, as held by this Court in Narinder Singh [Narinder Singh v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., (2014) 9 SCC 324 : (2014) 5 SCC (Civ) 43] , entitling the insurer to repudiate the policy.