Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 236 (1.21 seconds)
Documents citing United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Shri Gian Chand And Others on 2 September, 1997

Demoy Kishku &Amp; Ors vs Basant Mahto &Amp; Ors on 4 October, 2010

However, in this case it is established by the pleadings and the evidence that the driver had no valid license so held but it was not a case that the license was not proved by the Insurance Company and hence held that in decision reported in 1997 (7) SCC 558 (United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Gian Chand & Ors.) is not 19 applicable and was distinguished when consider.
Patna High Court - Orders Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mangu & Anr vs Surya Prakash & Anr on 3 October, 2012

Vs. Gian Chand & Ors. (supra) reveals that it was an admitted position in the said case that driver did not have the driving licence and it was in those circumstances that Hon'ble the Apex Court held that since it was not the case of the owner that he did not know that the driver whom the vehicle was handed over was 9 not having a valid licence, no fault can be found with the finding reached by the Tribunal as well as by the the High Court holding the said owner liable. Para 10 of the judgment reads as under:-
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Dharmi Devi And Ors. on 9 April, 2001

In the judgment of Gian Chand's case (supra), the Apex Court while dealing with a case where it was admitted fact that driver was not having valid licence and the owner of the vehicle did not appear in the witness-box, held that an adverse inference be necessarily drawn against him (owner) to the effect that the vehicle has been handed over by him or being driven by unlicensed driver. The judgment of the Apex Court has no application to the facts of this case. As held above, defendant-appellant insurance company when failed to discharge initial burden to prove their case, therefore even in the absence of the evidence of the owner of the vehicle the issue cannot be decided in favour of the appellant insurance company.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - P C Tatia - Full Document

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Sadanandan on 2 November, 1999

7. In the present case, apart from contending that it was the respondent No. 4 who was the driver of the vehicle and not the respondent No. 1, owner of the vehicle did not take any step to substantiate the above contention. He did not enter the box to give evidence nor the respondent No. 4. Respondent No. 1 also did not contest the matter. Under these circumstances, as was observed by the Supreme Court in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Gian Chand, 1997 ACJ 1065 (SC), when unlicensed driver was entrusted with the bus with the knowledge of the insured, the insurer is absolved of the liability to the third party.
Kerala High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Prito And Ors. on 4 January, 2000

While distinguishing these two earlier cases, their Lordships of the Apex Court, who decided the case in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Gian Chand (supra), found on facts that the owner of the vehicle committed a breach of the condition of insurance policy which required the owner not to permit the vehicle to be driven by an unlicensed driver and that, therefore, while accepting the factual findings of the Tribunal as also by the High Court in that case about the lapse on the part of the, owner in handing over the vehicle to an unlicensed driver, the insurance company was held exonerated from its liability to meet the claims of the third party who might have suffered on account of vehicular accident caused by such an unlicensed driver.
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - D Raju - Full Document

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs M.Pushpan on 24 April, 2009

16.Likewise, the other decision relied on by the learned counsel in UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. GLAN CHAND AND OTHERS reported in 1997 ACJ 1065, (cited supra) was entirely in a different circumstances, where the vehicle was driven by a person who did not possess a valid driving licence. The said issue does not arise for consideration in the present matter.
Madras High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 1 - T S Sivagnanam - Full Document

National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs N. Devadas And Ors. on 16 April, 1999

In the light of the peculiar factual position, the principle laid down in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Gian Chand , namely, that the insured himself had handed over the vehicle for the purpose of driving to an unlicensed driver is not helpful to the appellant insurance company. On the other hand, the other decisions referred to above are directly on the point; accordingly the only contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is liable to be rejected.
Madras High Court Cites 22 - Cited by 4 - P Sathasivam - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next