Judgment related to vehicle hired / leased and MV act

 

 

JUDGMENT RELATED TO VEHICLE HIRED / LEASED AND MV ACT

 

 

1.Liability of IC minibus hired by Corporation along with IP driver provided by the owner who was supposed to drive as per the instruction of the conductor, who is employee of Corporation accident whether IC is liable held –yes.

2011 ACJ 2145 (SC) – UPRTC v/s Kulsum, 2014 ACJ

1274 (AP) – UII Com v/s Sharapuram Balavva, 2016

ACJ 2108 (All)

2. Owner Hirer Lease Buses hired by Corporation and

plied them on the routes alloted to Corporation. Injuries

by such buses Whether IC is liable. Held – Yes.

2013 ACJ 1593 (FB), 2014 ACJ 1323 (Kar), 2014

ACJ 1432 (AP), 2022 ACCJ 211 (Tel) but 2014 ACJ

1605 (Mad)NII

Com. v/s K. Vaijayanthimala.,

2015 ACJ 2675 (All), 2011 ACJ 2145 (SC) – UPRTC

v/s Rajeshwari, 2015 ACJ 1 (SC) HDFC bank v/s

Reshma, 2015 ACJ 2849 (SC) = 2016(2) SCC 382

Karnataka SRTC v/s New India Assurance Com.,

2016 ACJ 485 (AP), 2016 ACJ 1992 (Man), 2017 ACJ

1860 (Kar), wherein it is held that deviation from permitted route can be construe as breach of permit but not of the purpose allowed in the permit.

3. Vehicle     on lease Owner leased his vehicle to State

 -department driver of owner met with accident Whether

State is liable? Held ; yes.

As per Section 2(30), owner of the vehicle includes a person in

possession of vehicle subject to agreement of lease State

held to owner and held responsible to pay amount of compassion.

2014 ACJ 893 (Gau), When control of the vehicle hired is with the hirer, policy is deemed to be transferred along with the vehicle – UPSRTC v/s. National Insurance Com. 2021

ACJ 2282 (SC)

4. OwnerHirer – Van hirer by courier company under an

agreement and as per the conditions of the agreement,

owner was required to take comprehensive policy. No

evidence that driver was driving Van under the

direction and supervision of the hirer Courier Com. Whether

Hirer is liable? Held ; No.

2014 ACJ 1790 (Mad).

5. Truck was taken on hire along with its driver by PWD

for constriction of road – when vehicles was being

driven by driver under the instruction of officer of

PWD, accident occurred – Whether PWD can held

responsible to pay compensation? Held – Yes.

2015 ACJ 1162 (HP).

6. Vehicle given on hire – IC dispute its liability on

the ground that intimation with respect to the hire

had not been given to the IC and additional premium

as per PMT 44 had not been paid – Whether sustainable? Held ; No.

2019 ACJ 355 (Hyd)