Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.25 seconds)Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd vs Angad Kol & Ors on 18 February, 2009
ii) (2009) II SCC 356 (Oriental Insurance Company
Limited v/s Angod Kol & Others), wherein at para 37 it is
held that, Ram Narain was having licence to driver light
motor vehicle. The licence was not endorsed as required
SCCH 17 25 MVC.No.2069/16
and hence, he could not have been driven TATA 709 in the
absence of requisite endorsement and the insurance
company could not be held liable.
Nagashetty vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors on 17 August, 2001
In the backdrop of discussion supra, the decision
passed in Nagashetty case (Supra), which is squarely
applicable to the facts situation on hand and said decision
still holds the filed, the insurer is liable to pay compensation
to the petitioners. Accordingly, this issue is answered.
S.Iyyapan vs M/S United India Insurance Co.Ld.& Anr on 1 July, 2013
In decisions reported in i) AIR 2013 SC 2262
(S.Iyappan v/s United India Insurance Company and
another), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held that - the
accident involving maxi cab and cycle, driver of maxi cab
holding valid licence to drive Light Motor vehicle but did not
have endorsement to drive maxi cab, mere absence of
SCCH 17 29 MVC.No.2069/16
endorsement does not exonerate insurer of its statutory
liability to pay compensation.
Kulwant Singh & Ors vs Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd on 28 October, 2014
ii) (2015) 2 SCC 186 (Kulwant Singh and Others v/s
Oriental Insurance Company), wherein it is held that a
driver who had a valid licence to drive a light motor vehicle,
therefore, was authorised to drive a light goods vehicle as
well. Merely, because the driver did not get any
endorsement in the driving licence to drive Mahindra maxi
cab, which is a light motor vehicle, the Hon'ble High Court
has committed grave error of law in holding the licence to
drive the commercial vehicle.
Mukund Dewangan vs Oriental Ins.Co.Ltd on 11 February, 2016
It is significant to note that in a judgment passed in
the Hon'ble Apex Court in (Mukund Dewangan v/s Oriental
Ins.
Section 134 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 158 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 170 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Smt. Rajesh And Others vs Rajbir Singh And Others on 29 January, 2010
Compensation to the family members (children and family
members other than wife) for loss of love and affection,
deprivation of protection, social security etc.
SCCH 17 20 MVC.No.2069/16
In case of Rajesh V/s Rajbir Singh (supra) the
Hon'ble Apex Court granted Rs.1,00,000/- for loss of care
and guidance for minor children.