Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 37 (0.98 seconds)Section 10 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 96 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 2 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 149 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 10 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 66 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Prabhu Lal on 30 November, 2007
In Ashok Gangadhar Maratha in para 10 (supra), S.Iyyapan v. United
India Insurance Co. (supra), Kulwant Singh & Ors. v. Oriental Insurance Co.
Ltd. (supra), and Nagashetty v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.
(supra), the view taken is that when driver is holding licence to drive
light motor vehicle, he is competent to drive transport vehicle of that
category; whereas in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Prabhu Lal (supra) the
view taken is that before 2001 also it was necessary for a driver
possessing licence to drive Light Motor Vehicle to obtain endorsement to
drive transport vehicle of that category; whereas in National Insurance Co.
Ltd. v. Annappa Irappa Nesaria (supra), this Court laid down that before
28.3.2001 there was no necessity for holder of licence to drive light motor
vehicle to have endorsement to drive transport vehicle; whereas in New
India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Roshanben Rahemansha Fakir & Anr. (supra) and
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Angad Kol & Ors. (supra), the view taken is
that it is necessary for holder of light motor vehicle licence to obtain
specific endorsement on licence, to drive transport vehicle of the light
motor vehicle weight as provided in section 2(41).
Thus, there appears to be a conflict in the decisions of this Court with
respect to the pre-amended position and also after amendment has been
effected in the Forms in 2001. In view of aforesaid discussion, following
questions are required to be referred to larger Bench :
New India Assurance Co.Ltd vs Roshanben Rahemansha Fakir & Anr on 12 May, 2008
In Ashok Gangadhar Maratha in para 10 (supra), S.Iyyapan v. United
India Insurance Co. (supra), Kulwant Singh & Ors. v. Oriental Insurance Co.
Ltd. (supra), and Nagashetty v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.
(supra), the view taken is that when driver is holding licence to drive
light motor vehicle, he is competent to drive transport vehicle of that
category; whereas in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Prabhu Lal (supra) the
view taken is that before 2001 also it was necessary for a driver
possessing licence to drive Light Motor Vehicle to obtain endorsement to
drive transport vehicle of that category; whereas in National Insurance Co.
Ltd. v. Annappa Irappa Nesaria (supra), this Court laid down that before
28.3.2001 there was no necessity for holder of licence to drive light motor
vehicle to have endorsement to drive transport vehicle; whereas in New
India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Roshanben Rahemansha Fakir & Anr. (supra) and
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Angad Kol & Ors. (supra), the view taken is
that it is necessary for holder of light motor vehicle licence to obtain
specific endorsement on licence, to drive transport vehicle of the light
motor vehicle weight as provided in section 2(41).
Thus, there appears to be a conflict in the decisions of this Court with
respect to the pre-amended position and also after amendment has been
effected in the Forms in 2001. In view of aforesaid discussion, following
questions are required to be referred to larger Bench :