ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. JAGDISHCHANDRA KANCHANLAL PARIKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal and the cross-objections of the claimants involve common question of law and facts, hence both are proposed to be disposed of by a common judgment.

(2.) The appeal has been filed by the Oriental Insurance Company who had insured the vehicle bearing truck No. GTE 8109. It was a goods vehicle insured with the appellant. The respondent No. 1 is the claimant. The vehicle bearing truck No. GTK 3727 is another vehicle which was involved in the incident. It was owned by the respondent No. 3 and was driven by the respondent No. 2. The respondent No. 4 is the insurer of the said vehicle. Respondent No. 5 is the driver of the vehicle GTE 8109 whereas respondent No. 6 was its cleaner and respondent No. 7 was its owner.

(3.) It is not necessary for us to deal in detail the factual aspect of the case because the appeal of the appellant is based on limited point namely that the appellant is not liable under the terms of the insurance policy, under the terms of the motor permit issued by the Transport Authority and also in view of the Apex Court's verdict in Smt. Mallawwa v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.JT 1998 (8) SC 217.