https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461431 An insurer is not liable to indemnify where the accident vehicle is proved to be a transport vehicle and the driver held only a light motor vehicle licence without the necessary transport endorsement. The Court held that Section 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, read with Rule 16 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, requires authorisation to drive a transport vehicle. On the facts, the vehicle was a goods carriage, the evidence showed it was driven by a person without such authority, and the earlier decision in Ashok Gangadhar was distinguished because the transport use was supported by permit and documentary proof here. The claim against the insurer was therefore untenable. en-us Fri, 30 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Apr 2025 13:01:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461431 An insurer is not liable to indemnify where the accident vehicle is proved to be a transport vehicle and the driver held only a light motor vehicle licence without the necessary transport endorsement. The Court held that Section 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, read with Rule 16 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, requires authorisation to drive a transport vehicle. On the facts, the vehicle was a goods carriage, the evidence showed it was driven by a person without such authority, and the earlier decision in Ashok Gangadhar was distinguished because the transport use was supported by permit and documentary proof here. The claim against the insurer was therefore untenable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 30 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461431