Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (3.34 seconds)Section 149 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Swaran Singh & Ors on 5 January, 2004
This position was explained by the Supreme Court in National Insurance
Company Vs. Swaran Singh in (2204) 3 SCC 297. In para 104, 105 and
110 the Court said as follows:
New India Assurance Co., Shimla vs Kamla And Ors on 27 March, 2001
1. While considering the defence of the Insurance
Company that there had been no valid driving license for the driver, relying
on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in New India Insurance
Company Vs. Kamla 2001 3 RCR that Insurance Company shall be
bound to pay the amount due and claimed by the claimants, having regard
to the provisions of Section 149 (4) and (5) which makes liable the
Insurance Company to make the payment. The Tribunal has also granted
recovery rights to the Insurance Company.
The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Section 166 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
National Insurance Co.Ltd vs Parvathneni & Anr on 31 August, 2009
2. Learned counsel for the appellant refers to a
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Com. Ltd.,
and others Vs. Parvathneni and another reported in 2010 1 PLR 228
expressing doubt about statement of law that even when a Insurance
Company is not liable, it should be made to pay the amount to the
claimants and could obtain a right of recovery against the insured. The
reference to this Judgment, in my view, cannot help the appellant, for the
Hon'ble Supreme Court had dealt with a situation where there existed no
FAO No.3053 of 2010 2
liability at all for the Insurance Company. In the present case there is a
valid insurance and although, the insurance Company has a ground of
defence under Section 149 that there is no valid driving license it would still
be made liable by proviso to Section 149 (4) (5). The law must be
understood in this fashion. If there was no policy of insurance at all or the
claim arose under a situation where the owner is not bound to cover the
instances of compulsory insurance under Section 147 of the Motor Vehicle
Act, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') the principle of pay and recover
cannot apply. On the other hand, if there was a contract of insurance and
the situation of the claim against the owner fell within the arena of
compulsory insurance under Section 147 of the Act, the fact that there had
been a breach of the condition in the manner set out under Section 149 (2)
of the Act will not afford to the insurer to plead that it would not be liable to
satisfy the claim of a third party also. This right of the third party is
protected under proviso to Section 149 (4) and Section 149 (5) of the Act.
1