SC: Owner Not Liable When Fake Licence Not Proven to Be Entrusted Knowingly

SC holds that insurance companies must prove owner’s negligence or collusion before denying indemnity for fake licence cases

Supreme Court sets aside High Court’s “pay and recover” direction

Meetu Kumari | Oct 14, 2025 |

SC: Owner Not Liable When Fake Licence Not Proven to Be Entrusted Knowingly

SC: Owner Not Liable When Fake Licence Not Proven to Be Entrusted Knowingly

The case arose from a fatal road accident involving a truck owned by Hind Samachar Ltd. and a Matador van in which nine people lost their lives and two others were injured. The truck was insured with National Insurance Company Ltd. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal found both vehicles responsible for combined negligence in a 75:25 ratio and directed both insurers to pay compensation.

HC’s Judgment: The High Court in appeal allowed the insurer to recover the paid amount from the truck owner, holding that the driver’s licence was fake and suspecting collusion between the owner and driver. Aggrieved by this finding, the owner approached the Supreme Court.

Issue Raised: Whether the insurance company can recover compensation from the vehicle owner under a “pay and recover” direction when the driver’s licence was allegedly fake, without proving that the owner knowingly allowed an unlicensed driver to operate the vehicle.

SC’s Judgment: The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and set aside the HC’s recovery order, observing that the insurer had failed to prove that the owner had knowledge of the fake licence or was negligent in employing the driver. The Court held that the insurer’s liability to indemnify the insured under Section 149(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act continues unless a willful breach of policy terms is proved.
The Court held that a fake or invalid licence by itself does not absolve the insurer. Proof of a willful and conscious breach by the owner is required. Hind Samachar Ltd. had produced the driver’s licence and renewal certificate issued by the DTO, Gurdaspur. The so-called fake licence register was unreliable, and there was no evidence that the company knowingly violated the policy.

The Court reaffirmed principles laid down in United India Insurance Co. v. Lehru and National Insurance Co. v. Swaran Singh, holding that insurers cannot avoid liability in the absence of proof of deliberate breach of policy. Therefore, the Court reinstated the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal’s order and held that the insurer cannot recover compensation from the owner.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below

StudyCafe Membership

Join StudyCafe Membership. For More details about Membership Click Join Membership Button
Join Membership

In case of any Doubt regarding Membership you can mail us at [email protected]

Join Studycafe's WhatsApp Group or Telegram Channel for Latest Updates on Government Job, Sarkari Naukri, Private Jobs, Income Tax, GST, Companies Act, Judgements and CA, CS, ICWA, and MUCH MORE!"




Author Bio
My Recent Articles
ITAT Ahmedabad deletes major TP additions, limits R&D deduction to DSIR approval PCIT’s Section 263 revision quashed where AO had made due enquiries on alleged bogus purchases Delhi HC awards 6% interest on VAT refund delayed by over 15 years Delhi HC sets aside GST order passed without proper service of show cause notice CBI Court Sentences Three to 3 Years’ Jail in Rs. 1.18 Crore Excise Duty Rebate FraudView All Posts