allowed the goods vehicle to be used by allowing
gratuitous passengers and therefore there is clear violation
of the terms and conditions of the policy ... 2014,
the Tribunal held that the respondent No.3 had allowed
the gratuitous passengers in his vehicle and therefore the
petitioners who were claiming
allowed the goods vehicle to be used by allowing
gratuitous passengers and therefore there is clear violation
of the terms and conditions of the policy ... 2014,
the Tribunal held that the respondent No.3 had allowed
the gratuitous passengers in his vehicle and therefore the
petitioners who were claiming
allowed the goods vehicle to be used by allowing
gratuitous passengers and therefore there is clear violation
of the terms and conditions of the policy ... 2014,
the Tribunal held that the respondent No.3 had allowed
the gratuitous passengers in his vehicle and therefore the
petitioners who were claiming
allowed the goods vehicle to be used by allowing
gratuitous passengers and therefore there is clear violation
of the terms and conditions of the policy ... 2014,
the Tribunal held that the respondent No.3 had allowed
the gratuitous passengers in his vehicle and therefore the
petitioners who were claiming
allowed the goods vehicle to be used by allowing
gratuitous passengers and therefore there is clear violation
of the terms and conditions of the policy ... 2014,
the Tribunal held that the respondent No.3 had allowed
the gratuitous passengers in his vehicle and therefore the
petitioners who were claiming
allowed the goods vehicle to be used by allowing
gratuitous passengers and therefore there is clear violation
of the terms and conditions of the policy ... 2014,
the Tribunal held that the respondent No.3 had allowed
the gratuitous passengers in his vehicle and therefore the
petitioners who were claiming
allowed the goods vehicle to be used by allowing
gratuitous passengers and therefore there is clear violation
of the terms and conditions of the policy ... 2014,
the Tribunal held that the respondent No.3 had allowed
the gratuitous passengers in his vehicle and therefore the
petitioners who were claiming
allowed the goods vehicle to be used by allowing
gratuitous passengers and therefore there is clear violation
of the terms and conditions of the policy ... 2014,
the Tribunal held that the respondent No.3 had allowed
the gratuitous passengers in his vehicle and therefore the
petitioners who were claiming
allowed the goods vehicle to be used by allowing
gratuitous passengers and therefore there is clear violation
of the terms and conditions of the policy ... 2014,
the Tribunal held that the respondent No.3 had allowed
the gratuitous passengers in his vehicle and therefore the
petitioners who were claiming
allowed the goods vehicle to be used by allowing
gratuitous passengers and therefore there is clear violation
of the terms and conditions of the policy ... 2014,
the Tribunal held that the respondent No.3 had allowed
the gratuitous passengers in his vehicle and therefore the
petitioners who were claiming
