Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.20 seconds)

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs Naba Kumar Mondal And Anr. on 28 June, 2004

"A Division Bench of Himachal Pradesh in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Anil Kr. and Ors., reported in 2001 (2) T.A.C. 35, has held as under: 'After analysing the factual and legal position for the purpose of deciding the present case, the vehicle is not covered by a permit to ply for hire or reward and it was a private vehicle not carrying any passenger for hire or reward. It is the owner of the vehicle herself who gave the vehicle/ allowed the vehicle to be used as taxi to carry passengers for hire or reward and, therefore, it cannot be said that she has not committed breach of condition of the policy which is the same as the one not permitted by the statutory provisions. The appellant-company has established that the breach was on the part of the insured and we find that it was the insured who was guilty of violating the terms or infringement of the contract by handing over a private vehicle for using it as taxi for hire or reward which is a fundamental breach of specified condition of the policy and the exclusion clause under Section 96(2)(b)(i)(a) shall expressly apply in the case in hand denying the respondent owner of the vehicle indemnification by the appellant company."
Calcutta High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 3 - M Sinha - Full Document
1