{"id":154106,"date":"2008-03-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-03-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008"},"modified":"2018-06-26T00:09:44","modified_gmt":"2018-06-25T18:39:44","slug":"national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008","title":{"rendered":"National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Geeta Bhat & Ors on 31 March, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Geeta Bhat & Ors on 31 March, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: S Sinha<\/div>\n
Bench: S.B. Sinha, V.S. Sirpurkar<\/div>\n
           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  2257 of 2008\n\nPETITIONER:\nNational Insurance Co. Ltd\n\nRESPONDENT:\nGeeta Bhat & Ors\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 31\/03\/2008\n\nBENCH:\nS.B. Sinha & V.S. Sirpurkar\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n
REPORTABLE<\/p>\n
CIVIL APPEAL NO  2257 OF 2008
\n(Arising out of SLP (C) No.18509 of 2004)<\/p>\n
S.B. Sinha, J.\n<\/p>\n
1.\tLeave granted.\n<\/p>\n
2.\tOn 14.11.2000, Ishwar Dutt Bhat was traveling in a three wheeler.  It
\nmet with an accident having been hit by a truck bearing registreation No.HR
\n38 9179.  The said vehicle was insured with the appellant.
\nRespondents, being the heirs and legal representatives of the said Shri
\nIshwar Dutt, filed a claim petition.  Appellant, in its written statement, raised
\na contention that the driving licence possessed by the driver of the truck was
\na fake one.\n<\/p>\n
3.\tIn the proceedings before the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims
\nTribunal (the Tribunal), it prayed for examination of the concerned clerk of
\nthe Motor Vehicles Department.  The said prayer was allowed.  The
\nconcerned Clerk of the Licencing Authority, Alwar was summoned.  The
\nsaid summons were served in the office of the Transport Authority.  The
\nTransport Authority, however, did not depute any officer to produce the
\ndocuments called for.\n<\/p>\n
Appellant, however, brought on records evidence to the effect that on
\nan investigation made by its own investigator, it was found that no such
\nlicence had been issued in the name of Gopal Singh, the driver of the
\nvehicle.  In its report dated 20.3.2003, the said investigator stated :
\n“Kindly, note that an application was moved by us
\nto the LA Alwar to issue the verification certificate
\nfor the DL No. as cited above, along with the
\nphotocopy of the DL received by us.\n<\/p>\n
\tBut our opinion was returned back by the
\nconcerning officer because the above ref. DL has
\nno relevancy with the records LA Alwar.
\n\tHowever, the record register was shown to
\nus which shows that DL No.20734\/94 was issued
\non dated 28.3.94.\n<\/p>\n
\tThus, it is confirmed that no such DL
\nNo.3956\/Alwar\/94 dated 27.3.94 is issued by LA
\nAlwar.\n<\/p>\n
Conclusion : Verification certificate for the above
\nsaid DL cannot be obtained from LA Alwar.
\n\tThis report is issued without prejudice.”\n<\/p>\n
4.\tThe Tribunal, however, on the premise that the said fact was not
\nproved, held :\n<\/p>\n
“The insurance company in spite of availing
\nseveral opportunities did not lead any evidence in
\nsupport of this assertion that Respondent No.1 was
\nnot holding a valid and effective driving licence.
\nSo the Insurance Company has failed to discharge
\nthe onus of this issue.  Accordingly this issue is
\ndecided against the Insurance Company.”\n<\/p>\n
\tThe appeal preferred by the appellant before the High Court was
\ndismissed summarily.\n<\/p>\n
5.\tMr. B.K. Satija, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant,
\nwould submit that the licence of the driver having been found to be a fake
\none, the High Court committed a serious error in dismissing the appeal of
\nthe appellant summarily.\n<\/p>\n
6.\tLiability of an insurer to reimburse the insured, as an owner of the
\nvehicle not only depends upon the terms and conditions laid down in the
\ncontract of insurance but also the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act,
\n1988 (the Act).  The owner of vehicle is statutorily obligated to obtain an
\ninsurance for the vehicle to cover the third party risk.  A distinction has to be
\nborne in mind in regard to a claim made by the insured in respect of damage
\nof his vehicle or filed by the owner or any passenger of the vehicle as
\ncontradistinguished from a claim made by a third party.\n<\/p>\n
7.\tAn owner of the vehicle is bound to make reasonable enquiry as to
\nwhether the person who is authorized to drive the vehicle holds a licence or
\nnot.  Such a licence not only must be an effective one but should also be a
\nvalid one.  It should be issued for driving a category of vehicle as specified
\nin the Motor Vehicles Act and\/or Rules framed thereunder.\n<\/p>\n
8.\tIndisputably, in a case where the terms of the contract of insurance are
\nfound to have been violated by the insured, the insurer may not be held to be
\nliable for reimbursing the insured.  So far as a driving licence of a
\nprofessional driver is concerned, the owner of the vehicle, despite taking
\nreasonable care, might have not been able to find out as to whether the
\nlicence was a fake one or not.  He is not expected to verify the genuineness
\nthereof from the Transport Offices.\n<\/p>\n
9.\tThe question in regard to the statutory obligation on the part of an
\nowner of a vehicle to obtain an insurance policy to cover a third party risk,
\nvis-`-vis possession of a fake licence by a driver who had been employed
\nbona fide by the owner thereof had come up for consideration before this
\nCourt United India Insurance Co. Ld. v. Lehru & Ors.<\/a> [(2003) 3 SCC 338].\n<\/p>\n
10.\tLehru’s case was noticed in great details by a Three Judge Bench of
\nthis Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh<\/a> [(2004) 3 SCC
\n297], holding :\n<\/p>\n
“92. It may be true as has been contended on
\nbehalf of the petitioner that a fake or forged
\nlicence is as good as no licence but the question
\nherein, as noticed hereinbefore, is whether the
\ninsurer must prove that the owner was guilty of the
\nwilful breach of the conditions of the insurance
\npolicy or the contract of insurance. In Lehru case
\nthe matter has been considered in some detail. We
\nare in general agreement with the approach of the
\nBench but we intend to point out that the
\nobservations made therein must be understood to
\nhave been made in the light of the requirements of
\nthe law in terms whereof the insurer is to establish
\nwilful breach on the part of the insured and not for
\nthe purpose of its disentitlement from raising any
\ndefence or for the owners to be absolved from any
\nliability whatsoever. We would be dealing in some
\ndetail with this aspect of the matter a little later.”\n<\/p>\n
11.\tSwaran Singh had been followed later on in some cases by this Court.
\nIt was, however, distinguished in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Laxmi
\nNarain Dhut<\/a> [(2007) 3 SCC 700] in the following terms :
\n“9. The primary stand of the insurance company is
\nthat the person driving the vehicle did not have a
\nvalid driving licence. In Swaran Singh case the
\nfollowing situations were noted:\n<\/p>\n
(i)\tthe driver had a licence but it was fake;\n<\/p>\n
(ii)\tthe driver had no licence at all;\n<\/p>\n
(iii) \tthe driver originally had a valid licence but
\nit had expired as on the date of the accident
\nand had not been renewed;\n<\/p>\n
(iv)\tthe licence was for a class of vehicles other
\nthan that which was the insured vehicle;\n<\/p>\n
(v)\tlicence was a learner’s licence.\n<\/p>\n
Category ( i ) may cover two types of situations.
\nFirst, the licence itself was fake and the second is
\nwhere originally that licence is fake but there has
\nbeen a renewal subsequently in accordance with
\nlaw.\n<\/p>\n
XXX\t\t\tXXX\t\t\tXXX\n<\/p>\n
37. As noted above, the conceptual difference
\nbetween third-party right and own damage cases
\nhas to be kept in view. Initially, the burden is on
\nthe insurer to prove that the licence was a fake one.
\nOnce it is established the natural consequences
\nhave to flow.\n<\/p>\n
XXX\t\t\tXXX\t\t\tXXX\n<\/p>\n
38. In view of the above analysis the following
\nsituations emerge :\n<\/p>\n
1.\tThe decision in Swaran Singh case 1 has no
\napplication to cases other than third-party
\nrisks.\n<\/p>\n
2. \tWhere originally the licence was a fake one,
\nrenewal cannot cure the inherent fatality.\n<\/p>\n
3.\t In case of third-party risks the insurer has to
\nindemnify the amount, and if so advised, to
\nrecover the same from the insured.\n<\/p>\n
4.\tThe concept of purposive interpretation has
\nno application to cases relatable to Section
\n149 of the Act.\n<\/p>\n
The High Courts\/Commission shall now consider
\nthe matter afresh in the light of the position in law
\nas delineated above.”\n<\/p>\n
12.\tThe said principle was reiterated in The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v.
\nMeena Variyal & Ors.<\/a> [2007 (5) SCALE 269] stating :
\n“It was argued by learned counsel for the appellant
\nthat since on the finding that the deceased was
\nhimself driving the vehicle at the time of the
\naccident, the accident arose due to the negligence
\nof the deceased himself and hence the insurer is
\nnot liable for the compensation.  Even if the case
\nof the claimant that the car was driven by
\nMahmood Hasan was true, then also, the claimant
\nhad to establish the negligence of the driver before
\nthe insured could be asked to indemnify the
\ninsured.  The decision in Minu B. Mehta & Anr. v.
\nBalkrishna Ramchandra Nayan & Anr.<\/a> [(1977) 2
\nSCR 886], of a three Judge Bench of this Court
\nwas relied on in support.\n<\/p>\n
XXX\t\t\tXXX\t\t\tXXX
\nLearned counsel for the respondent contended that
\nthere was no obligation on the claimant to prove
\nnegligence on the part of the driver.  Learned
\ncounsel relied on Gujarat State Road Transport
\nCorporation, Ahmedabad v. Ramanbhai
\nPrabhatbhai & Anr.<\/a> [(1987) 3 SCC 234] in
\nsupport.  In that decision, this Court clarified that
\nthe observations in Minu B. Mehta’s case (supra)
\nare in the nature of obiter dicta.  But, this Court
\nonly proceeded to notice that departures had been
\nmade from the law of strict liability and the Fatal
\nAccidents Act by introduction of Chapter VIIA of
\nthe 1939 Act and the introduction of Section 92A
\nproviding for compensation and the expansion of
\nthe provision as to who could make a claim,
\nnoticing that the application under Section 110A of
\nthe Act had to be made on behalf of or for the
\nbenefit of all the legal representatives of the
\ndeceased.  This Court has not stated that on a claim
\nbased on negligence there is no obligation to
\nestablish negligence.  This Court was dealing with
\nno-fault liability and the departure made from the
\nFatal Accidents Act and the theory of strict
\nliability in the scheme of the Act of 1939 as
\namended.  This Court did not have the occasion to
\nconstrue a provision like Section 163A of the Act
\nof 1988 providing for compensation without proof
\nof negligence in contradistinction to Section 166 of
\nthe Act.  We may notice that Minu B. Mehta’s case
\nwas decided by three learned Judges and the
\nGujarat State Road Transport Corporation case
\nwas decided only by two learned Judges.  An
\nobiter dictum of this Court may be binding only on
\nthe High Courts in the absence of a direct
\npronouncement on that question elsewhere by this
\nCourt.  But as far as this Court is concerned,
\nthough not binding, it does have clear persuasive
\nauthority.”\n<\/p>\n
\t[See also Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Brij Mohan & Ors.<\/a> [2007) 7
\nSCALE 753 and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Davinder Singh<\/a> [(2007)
\n8 SCC 698].\n<\/p>\n
\tIn Smt. Yallawwa & Ors. v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. [2007
\n(8) SCALE 77], this Court opined :\n<\/p>\n
“The recent decisions of this Court are authorities
\nfor the proposition that the insurance company
\nwould not be liable in cases where passengers of a
\nvehicle are not third parties.”\n<\/p>\n
\t{See also Prem Kumar & Ors. v. Prahlad Dev & Ors. [2008 (1)
\nSCALE 531] and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Prithvi Raj<\/a> [2008 (1)
\nSCALE 727]}.\n<\/p>\n
\tThus, whereas in a case where a third party has raised a claim, Swaran
\nSingh (supra) would apply, in a claim made by the owner of the vehicle or
\nother passengers of a vehicle, it would not.\n<\/p>\n
13.\tWe would, therefore, assume that the licence possessed by the 6th
\nrespondent, Gopal Singh was a fake one. Only because the same was fake,
\nthe same, having regard to the settled legal position, as noticed hereinbefore,
\nwould not absolve the insurer to reimburse the owner of a vehicle in respect
\nof the amount awarded in favour of a third party by the Tribunal in exercise
\nof its jurisdiction under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.\n<\/p>\n
14.\tNobody has appeared on behalf of the respondents despite service of
\nnotice.\n<\/p>\n
15.\tWe, therefore, are of the opinion that interest of justice shall be
\nsubserved if the appellant is directed to pay the awarded amount in favour of
\nrespondent Nos.1 to 5 with liberty to recover the same from the owner and
\nthe driver of the vehicle, respondent Nos.6 and 7 in an appropriate
\nproceeding in accordance with law.\n<\/p>\n
16.\tThe appeal is dismissed with the aforementioned observations.  No
\ncosts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Geeta Bhat & Ors on 31 March, 2008 Author: S Sinha Bench: S.B. Sinha, V.S. Sirpurkar CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 2257 of 2008 PETITIONER: National Insurance Co. Ltd RESPONDENT: Geeta Bhat & Ors DATE OF JUDGMENT: 31\/03\/2008 BENCH: S.B. Sinha & V.S. Sirpurkar JUDGMENT: J U […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-154106","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nNational Insurance Co. Ltd vs Geeta Bhat & Ors on 31 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Geeta Bhat & Ors on 31 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-03-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-25T18:39:44+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Geeta Bhat & Ors on 31 March, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-03-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-25T18:39:44+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2027,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008\",\"name\":\"National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Geeta Bhat & Ors on 31 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-03-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-25T18:39:44+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Geeta Bhat & Ors on 31 March, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Geeta Bhat & Ors on 31 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Geeta Bhat & Ors on 31 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-03-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-25T18:39:44+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Geeta Bhat & Ors on 31 March, 2008","datePublished":"2008-03-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-25T18:39:44+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008"},"wordCount":2027,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008","name":"National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Geeta Bhat & Ors on 31 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-03-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-25T18:39:44+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-co-ltd-vs-geeta-bhat-ors-on-31-march-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Geeta Bhat & Ors on 31 March, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/154106","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=154106"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/154106\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=154106"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=154106"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=154106"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}