Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.20 seconds)
Gurmeet Singh vs Surjit Kaur And Ors on 4 December, 2018 cites

United India Insurance Company Ltd vs Lehru And Ors on 28 February, 2003

In this case, original driving licence of driver of offending vehicle was fake. At the time of his appointment, owner of offending vehicle had not only taken his test but had also seen his driving licence and inquired from his previous employer, as such, there was no reason for him/owner to doubt that licence of Narinder Singh was not valid. Accident had taken place on 24.07.2010 and the driving licence of respondent No.4 was stated to be valid w.e.f. 19.04.2010 to 18.04.2013. Owner of offending vehicle has been successful in proving that there was no wilful negligence or lack of reasonable care on his part while employing or allowing respondent No.4 to drive the offending vehicle. Tribunal while allowing recovery right to the insurer has not looked into the evidence, as discussed above and the law is settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of Pepsu Road Transport Corporation Vs. National Insurance Company (supra), United India Insurance Company Vs. Lehru and others (supra), National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Swaran Singh and others (supra).
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 848 - Full Document

Pepsu Road Transport Corp vs National Insurance Co on 26 August, 2013

In this case, original driving licence of driver of offending vehicle was fake. At the time of his appointment, owner of offending vehicle had not only taken his test but had also seen his driving licence and inquired from his previous employer, as such, there was no reason for him/owner to doubt that licence of Narinder Singh was not valid. Accident had taken place on 24.07.2010 and the driving licence of respondent No.4 was stated to be valid w.e.f. 19.04.2010 to 18.04.2013. Owner of offending vehicle has been successful in proving that there was no wilful negligence or lack of reasonable care on his part while employing or allowing respondent No.4 to drive the offending vehicle. Tribunal while allowing recovery right to the insurer has not looked into the evidence, as discussed above and the law is settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of Pepsu Road Transport Corporation Vs. National Insurance Company (supra), United India Insurance Company Vs. Lehru and others (supra), National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Swaran Singh and others (supra).
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 328 - Full Document

National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Swaran Singh & Ors on 5 January, 2004

In this case, original driving licence of driver of offending vehicle was fake. At the time of his appointment, owner of offending vehicle had not only taken his test but had also seen his driving licence and inquired from his previous employer, as such, there was no reason for him/owner to doubt that licence of Narinder Singh was not valid. Accident had taken place on 24.07.2010 and the driving licence of respondent No.4 was stated to be valid w.e.f. 19.04.2010 to 18.04.2013. Owner of offending vehicle has been successful in proving that there was no wilful negligence or lack of reasonable care on his part while employing or allowing respondent No.4 to drive the offending vehicle. Tribunal while allowing recovery right to the insurer has not looked into the evidence, as discussed above and the law is settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of Pepsu Road Transport Corporation Vs. National Insurance Company (supra), United India Insurance Company Vs. Lehru and others (supra), National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Swaran Singh and others (supra).
Supreme Court of India Cites 68 - Cited by 3847 - Full Document
1