Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Monday, 10 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2018-05-17 dismissed

Amrit Paul Singh & Anr vs TATA AIG General Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors

Bench: 2 — Dipak Misra

In Brief

A motorist was killed when hit by a truck with temporary registration that lacked a valid permit under Section 66 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The insurance company denied liability, claiming the vehicle was being used illegally. Both the tribunal and High Court awarded compensation of Rs. 15,63,120 and directed the insurer to pay but recover the amount from the vehicle owner and driver. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, holding that operating a vehicle without a permit is a fundamental statutory breach distinct from technical driving licence violations. Exceptions to the permit requirement must be formally pleaded and proved, not invoked during argument. The insurer remains liable to third parties but can recover from the owner under the pay-and-recover principle."

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Motor Vehicles Act 1988 Insurance Law Third Party Liability Vehicle Permit Fundamental Statutory Infraction Pay and Recover Principle

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login