Shila vs Sushil Kumar (Deleted) on 27 January, 2015
In National Insurance Company Ltd.
v. Parveen Kumar and others (supra) it was observed:
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 22 (0.96 seconds)Ms. Maria Claudia vs Mr. Suresh Kumar on 3 September, 2014
In National Insurance Company
Ltd. v. Parveen Kumar and others (supra) it was observed:
Ms. Maria Claudia vs Mr. Suresh Kumar on 3 September, 2014
In National Insurance Company
Ltd. v. Parveen Kumar and others (supra) it was observed:
Sat Pal And Anr. vs Ram Phal And Ors. on 28 November, 2005
In National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Parveen Kumar and Ors. (supra) the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court, while dealing with the similar controversy observed as under:
Shamsher Singh vs The New India Insurance Company Ltd. And ... on 13 October, 2011
Some decisions of this Court have also been cited before me,
out of which the decision in National Insurance Company Limited v.
Parveen Kumar, 2005(1) RCR (Civil) 485 seems to have no application to
the facts of this case because in that case, the accident was found to have
occurred due to mechanical failure and not because the driver was not
possessing the requisite type of licence.
New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Guriqbal Singh And Anr on 30 October, 2015
10. The observation in case of Parveen Kumar (supra) are
not strictly applicable in the facts and circumstances of this case.
The question involved here is whether driving licence of driver of
offending vehicle was valid to drive mini bus involved in accident.
National Insurance Company Ltd vs Harbans Kaur And Ors on 26 March, 2018
Before adverting to the submission made by counsel for the
parties, it is appropriate to note that the vehicle in question is an oil tanker
meant for transporting oil. There is also no dispute that the vehicle is a
Heavy Transport Vehicle and the driver possessed licence authorizing him
to drive transport vehicle as it was valid from 06.10.2007 to 17.09.2010
and accident took place on 26.12.2009. The Tribunal by relying upon
judgments of this Court National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Parveen
Kumar and another, 2005 ACJ 1178, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.
Presiding Officer and another, CWP No.6739 of 2012, decided on
20.12.2012, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sanjay Kumar and others,
2012 ACJ 863 has held that the driver was competent to drive the vehicle
in question and the insurance company is jointly and severally liable to pay
compensation.
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs Ratibai And Ors. on 24 November, 2005
6. Thus, in view of the aforesaid discussions and also in view of the similar view which has been taken by Full Bench of Himachal Pradesh High Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Dharmu and Full Bench decision of Punjab & Haryana High Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Parveen Kumar and also by Supreme Court in the light of the decision of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh , we come to the conclusion that no breach has been established so as to absolve the insurer from making indemnification, thus, we find that there is no merit in the submission.
Jitender And Anr vs Oriental Insurance Company And Ors on 8 April, 2026
FAO-2921-2015 (O&M) -8-
Court in case National Insurance Company Limited v.
Parveen Kumar, 2005(1) RCR (Civil) 485 : 2005 ACJ
1178 (P&H) wherein their lordships while dealing with
the similar controversy had observed as under :-
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs Poonam And Ors. on 10 August, 2011
7. Mr. O.P. Mannie, the learned counsel for the respondents No.1
to 3, on the other hand, seeks to support the award by relying upon
the judgment of a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court
in the case of Mannulal vs. Chhagan Lal Chauhan and Others,
2005 ACJ 438 and a Full Bench decision of the Punjab and Haryana
High Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Parveen
Kumar and Others, 2005 ACJ 1178. It may be mentioned that both
the aforesaid decisions were also referred to and relied upon by the
learned Tribunal in coming to the conclusion that the Insurance
MAC. APP. 234/2007 Page 5 of 19
Company could not be absolved of its liability to pay the
compensation to the petitioners.