Related to motor vehicle act 1994
V.V.RAMDAS
(Querist) 04 October 2011
This query is : Resolved
Sir/Madam,
I would like to know the correct position of Law undr M.V.Act- that A person Purchaged a new "Mahendra Bolero"jeep/van
for commercial purpose and registed the same after 13 days of purchage before the local RTO and the vehicle was also duly insured and on 14th day, it mate an accident and the vehicle was damaged.He claimed insurance company for own damage but the insurance company repudiated the claim as there is no permit. Now my question is whether the insurance company is correct or wrong?If correct-How and if wrong-how. Please let me know the correct position of law.
jatin sharma
(Expert) 04 October 2011
your query is not clear, but as ur facts the insurance company is correct, because the person purchased the jeep for commercial purpose so the route permit should be own by person.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 04 October 2011
If fresh insurance was taken for a commercial vehicle or same old insurance policy of the old owner is the basis of present claim???
revert back with facts.
Arun Kumar Bhagat
(Expert) 05 October 2011
Insurance Company may decline to entertain claim if the vehicle was plying illegally like without valid licence, permit etc.
Shailesh Kr. Shah
(Expert) 05 October 2011
You said that "the insurance company repudiated the claim as there is no permit"
which permit they are asking?
J K Agrawal
(Expert) 05 October 2011
Your vehicle is Commercial vehicle so at least a permit is required to ply it if you charged fare from inmates.
If you used it not for hire and reward, there is no requirement of permit even if the vehicle is registered as commercial vehicle.
Permit is there or not the occupants are entitle to compensation amount. it is different thing that you pays or the insurance company pays.
Do not worry, there are so many ifs and buts but please engage an expert lawyer only otherwise the case is very risky.
Rupam Ghosh
(Expert) 05 October 2011
Correct, look the vehicle was purchased for commercial purpose so when it is on road there is few vehicular documents requirement which ought to have been obtained before taking the vehicle on road, it seems you are missing few of it, one being the permit asked by the insurance co which you have not supplied to the company at the time of your claim. So it didnt come under the purview of policy terms & conditions because of which the company repudiated your claim. If however you can obtain the copy of the permit sought by the company, you can claim again if you could show that it was prevailing at the time of the accident. Try again.
V.V.RAMDAS
(Querist) 19 October 2011
Dear Rupam Ghosh,
You have attempted to answer my question correctly. Thank you. But my intention is not fulfilled.Therefore I would like to clarify my self again .
"A"Purchaged a New "Bulero" jeep/van from a authorised Dealer after receiving necessary documents and a cash memo.The deler issued a temporary registration for the vehicle.As per Sec 43(2)of M.V Act a new vhicle has to be registred with in one month , and shall not be renewable. But "A" got the vehicle registed on 13th day for commercial purpose and not received permit,in the mean while on 14th day mate on accident and the vehicle damaged. There is valid insureance to the vehicle but the insurance company repudiated the claim with a reason that there was no permit at the relevant time of accident. my question is whether "A" can get the benefit of teporary registration as it is valid up to one month and the accident was within one month.Further whether the teporary registration includes permit ?
