• Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) Section   2(30) - ‘owner’ -  It is the person in whose name the motor vehicle stands registered who,  for the purposes of the Act, would be treated as the ‘owner’ - Where the registered owner has purported to transfer the vehicle but continues to be reflected in the records of the registering authority as the owner of the vehicle, he would not stand absolved of liability under the Act. HDFC Bank Limited v Reshma, (2015) 3 SCC 679 and Purnya Kala Devi v State of Assam, (2014) 14 SCC 142. Distinguished.Held, the principle underlying the provisions of Section 2(30) is that the victim of a motor accident or, in the case of a death, the legal heirs of the deceased victim should not be left in a state of uncertainty. A claimant for compensation ought not to be burdened with following a trail of successive transfers, which are not registered with the registering authority. To hold otherwise would be to defeat the salutary object and purpose of the Act. Hence, the interpretation to be placed must facilitate the fulfilment of the object of the law. (2018)1 SCeJ 307
  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) Section   2(30) - ‘owner’ -  Minor  - Where a person is a minor, the guardian of the minor would be treated as the owner. (2018)1 SCeJ 307
  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) Section   2(30), 50(3) -  There can be transfer of title by payment of consideration and delivery of the car -  But for the purposes of the Motor Vehicles Act, the person whose name is reflected in the records of the registering authority is the owner - The owner within the meaning of Section 2(30) is liable to compensate - The mandate of the law must be fulfilled - T V Jose v Chacko P M , (2001) 8 SCC 748, referred. (2018)1 SCeJ 307
  •  Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) Section   2(15), 2(48) – Driving licence which is valid for LMV is valid for driving of the transport vehicles of the same category.  (2018-1 ) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER 
  •  Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) Section   2(21) – Canter – After the amendment carried out in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 there is no licence required for medium goods vehicles, and there is only one category which is transport vehicle - Since the driver had a licence for a heavy goods vehicle, which is a transport vehicle and this licence would be valid for all transport vehicle – Insurance Company held liable. (2018-1) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) Section   2(21) - Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 - Licence for commercial vehicles - holder of the LMV licence had no authority to drive the commercial vehicle without proper endorsement from the concerned transport authority -For enabling a person to drive a commercial vehicle, the licencing authority has to ensure that he fulfils the requisite conditions of age, educational qualifications, medical certificate etc.  - Unless a person satisfies the licencing authority on that score and obtains proper authorisation for driving a commercial vehicle, he cannot be stated to be in possession of a valid and effective driving licence - There is evidently a fundamental breach of the terms and conditions of the policy for non-possession of a proper licence - Insured is not liable to be granted any compensation by the petitioner under the terms and conditions of the policy. (2017) PLRIJ 33 (NCDRC)
  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) Section   2(21) - Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 - Licence for commercial vehicles - holder of the LMV licence had no authority to drive the commercial vehicle without proper endorsement from the concerned transport authority -For enabling a person to drive a commercial vehicle, the licencing authority has to ensure that he fulfils the requisite conditions of age, educational qualifications, medical certificate etc.  - Unless a person satisfies the licencing authority on that score and obtains proper authorisation for driving a commercial vehicle, he cannot be stated to be in possession of a valid and effective driving licence - There is evidently a fundamental breach of the terms and conditions of the policy for non-possession of a proper licence - Insured is not liable to be granted any compensation by the petitioner under the terms and conditions of the policy. (2017) PLRIJ 33 (NCDRC) Download
  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) Section   2(21) - Central Rules Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989  - Whether a person licensed to drive a light motor vehicle is ipso facto entitled to drive a transport vehicle in that category, decided by a Bench of three Judges in in Mukund Dewangan Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. (2017) 14 SCC 663 – Submission that in Section 4, 7, 14 of the MVA and and Rule 5, 31 of the Central Rules Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and other provisions, there does not appear to be any exception carved out for transport vehicles which come in the light motor vehicle category - Since the prayer is for the reconsideration of Mukund Dewangan (supra), we are of the view that it is only appropriate that the prayer itself, in light of some of the submissions we have noted above, be considered by a larger Bench of 3 Judges. (2018)2 SCeJ 1155 Download
  •  Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) Section   2(21), (23), 10(2)(d) – Light motor vehicle would include the transport vehicle as per the weight prescribed under Section 2(21) read with Section 2(15) and 2(48) - There is no need to obtain separate endorsement to drive transport vehicle. (2018-1) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) Section   2(30) - ‘owner’ -  Hypothecation - Where a motor vehicle is subject to an agreement of hire purchase, lease or hypothecation, the person in possession of the vehicle under that agreement is treated as the owner.       (2018)1 SCeJ 307
  •  Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) Section   2(30), 50 – Transfer of Vehicle – It would be the registered owner who would pay the amount to the claimants and he has an independent right under the civil law to recover the same from the person to whom it is allegedly sold - So long as his name continues in the RTO's record, he would remain liable to a third person. (2018-1) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER 
  •    Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) S.   2(21) – Toyota Qualis falls within the definition LMV - Driving licence for LMV would be a valid driving licence for driving transport vehicles of the same class. (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  •   Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) S.   2(30) - ‘owner’ -  Hypothecation - Where a motor vehicle is subject to an agreement of hire purchase, lease or hypothecation, the person in possession of the vehicle under that agreement is treated as the owner.  (S.C.)(2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  •   Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) S.   2(30) - ‘owner’ -  It is the person in whose name the motor vehicle stands registered who,  for the purposes of the Act, would be treated as the ‘owner’ - Where the registered owner has purported to transfer the vehicle but continues to be reflected in the records of the registering authority as the owner of the vehicle, he would not stand absolved of liability under the Act. HDFC Bank Limited v Reshma, (2015) 3 SCC 679 and Purnya Kala Devi v State of Assam, (2014) 14 SCC 142. Distinguished. (S.C.)(2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  •   Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) S.   2(30) - ‘owner’ -  Minor  - Where a person is a minor, the guardian of the minor would be treated as the owner. (S.C.)(2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  •   Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) S.   2(30), 50(3) -  There can be transfer of title by payment of consideration and delivery of the car -  But for the purposes of the Motor Vehicles Act, the person whose name is reflected in the records of the registering authority is the owner - The owner within the meaning of Section 2(30) is liable to compensate - The mandate of the law must be fulfilled - T V Jose v Chacko P M , (2001) 8 SCC 748, referred.  (S.C.)(2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER 
  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) -  S. 2(28), (31), S. 66  - Permit - Use of a vehicle in a public place without a permit is a fundamental statutory infraction  - – Insurance company not liable .Download