NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. versus MANDAR MADHAV TAMBE AND ORS.
Only a person holding a valid driving licence or a permanent driving licence at the time of accident, other than a learner’s licence, is covered by the insurance policy; a person with only a learner’s licence is not duly licensed within the meaning of the Act and policy.
- Parties
- Appellant: New India Assurance Co. Ltd.; Respondent No.1: Mandar Madhav Tambe; Respondent No.2: Respondent No.2; Respondent No.3: Respondent No.3
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 14 December 1995
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Supreme Court, Appeal by Special Leave From Bombay High Court
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Driving Licence Requirements, Insurance Policy Exclusion Clauses
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Appellant
Mandar Madhav Tambe
Respondent No.1
Respondent No.2
Respondent No.2
Respondent No.3
Respondent No.3
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court, Appeal by Special Leave From Bombay High Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant company is entitled to invoke the provisions of Section 96(2)(b)(ii) of the Motor Vehicle Act
- 2 Whether the exclusion clause in the insurance policy absolves the appellant of liability
Ratio Decidendi
Only a person holding a valid driving licence or a permanent driving licence at the time of accident, other than a learner’s licence, is covered by the insurance policy; a person with only a learner’s licence is not duly licensed within the meaning of the Act and policy.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- Appeal allowed but with no order as to costs.
- Condition at grant of special leave: appellant to pay amount awarded to claimants irrespective of appeal outcome.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment