LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/amrit-paul-singh-anr-vs-tata-aig-general-insurance-co-ltd-ors-20180517/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Civil · Reportable judgment

Amrit Paul Singh & Anr. vs Tata Aig General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
17 May 2018
Case No.
Civil Appeal No.2253 of 2018
Result
Dismissed
Bench
Dipak Misra, A.M. Khanwilkar
Citation
[2018] 6 S.C.R. 838 : 2018 INSC 531
Supreme Court Reports [2018] 6 S.C.R. 838 : 2018 INSC 531
Headnote

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – s.166 – Fatal accident – Truck of appellant No.2 hit the motorcycle of the victim as a result of which victim sustained multiple injuries and died – Claim for compensation before the MACT – Tribunal held that the insurer was not liable, however, directed the amount of compensation with interest to be paid by the insurer with direction to recover the same from the owner and driver of the vehicle – Held: It is clear from the materials brought on record that the vehicle at the time of accident did not have a permit – Use of a vehicle in a place without a permit is a fundamental statutory infraction – Nothing was brought on record by the insured to prove that he had permit of the vehicle – In such a situation, the onus cannot be cast on the insurer – Therefore, the tribunal as well as the High Court had rightly directed the insurer to pay the compensation amount to the claimants with interest with stipulation that the insurer shall be entitled to recover the same from the owner and the driver – Doctrines/Principles – Pay and recover principle. Dismissing the appeal, the Court

HELD: The insurer had taken the plea that the vehicle in question had no permit. The existence of a permit of any nature is a matter of documentary evidence. Nothing has been brought on record by the insured to prove that he had a permit of the vehicle. In such a situation, the onus cannot be cast on the insurer. Therefore, the tribunal as well as the High Court had directed the insurer to pay the compensation amount to the claimants with interest with the stipulation that the insurer shall be entitled to recover the same from the owner and the driver. The said directions are in consonance with the principles stated in Swaran Singh and other cases pertaining to pay and recover principle. [Para 23] [851-F-H]

National Insurance Co. Ltd v. Swaran Singh and Others (2004) 3 SCC 297 : [2004] 1 SCR 180 – relied on.

National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Challa Bharathamma and Others (2004) 8 SCC 517 : [2004] 4 Suppl. SCR

587 ; Ashok Kumar Khemaka v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and Others 2014 (3) RCR (Civil) 1018 ; National Insurance Company Limited v. Kamlesh Kaur and Others 2006 (3) RCR (Civil) 634 ; Moti Ram v. ICICI Lombard and Others 2015 ACJ 1793 ; United India Insurance Co. Limited v. Lehru (2003) 3 SCC

Read the full headnote (2 more paragraphs)

338 : [2003] 2 SCR 495 ; Lakhmi Chand v. Reliance General Insurance (2016) 3 SCC 100 ; Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Meena Variyal and Others (2007)

5 SCC 428 : [2007] 4 SCR 641 ; HDFC Bank Limited v. Reshma and Others (2015) 3 SCC 679 ; Purnya Kala Devi v. State of Assam and Others (2014) 14 SCC 142 – referred to.

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DIPAK MISRA, CJI 1. The legal representatives of the deceased, Jagir Singh, the husband of the second respondent, preferred a claim petition being MACT Case No. 70 of 2013 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity, ‘the Act’) before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pathankot (for short, ‘the tribunal’) claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 36,00,000/-. The claim petition was filed on the basis that on 19.02.2013, Jagir Singh was travelling to Pathankot on his motor cycle and at that juncture, the offending truck bearing tem
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →