Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.19 seconds)The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Nirmala Kothari vs United India Insurance Co.Ltd. on 4 March, 2020
13. Further, reliance has been placed on the citation "Nirmala
Kothari Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd." 2020 ACJ 1218,
wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has been observed as under:-
Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd vs Asha And Ors on 19 January, 2018
In support of his contentions the learned
counsel relied upon judgments of Hon'ble High Court in the case of
"Shri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Asha and others" 2015
ACJ 1005 and "Madan Lal and others Vs. Savita & Ors". 2018(4)
RCR (Civil) 976 and prayed for acceptance of the present appeal.
Section 18 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Consumer Protection Act, 2019
Section 41 in Consumer Protection Act, 2019 [Entire Act]
United India Insurance Company Ltd vs Smt. Raj Rani And Others on 4 January, 2020
In the present case also, there is nothing on the record to show that
the second driving licence (Ex.OP-3), which was for plying heavy
motor vehicles, was forged and fabricated, rather the same was duly
verified from the concerned authorities and was found to be genuine.
Moreover, it is the categoric stand of the respondent/complainant that
driver of the said truck was a retired employee of the Indian Army and
since his first license did not have endorsement for driving Heavy
Motor Vehicles, therefore he bonafidely applied for the second license
so that he could ply heavy motor vehicles as well and an endorsement
FA No.91 of 2021 9
to that effect was made on the said DL. Hence, keeping in view the
law laid down by the Division Bench of High Court in the case of Raj
Rani (supra), it was incumbent on the appellant/insurance company to
produce on record, the relevant evidence to show that the same was
forged and fabricated.
1