Attau Rahman Masoodi, J. - (1.) Heard Sri B.C. Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Akhter Abbas, learned counsel for UPSRTC at length.
(2.) The dispute in the instant appeals has arisen between the insurer and UPSRTC on a limited ground i.e. lack of a permit under Section-66 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 as prescribed in the Insurance Policy; violation whereof ought to shift the liability upon the State Undertaking is the precise grievance raised by the appellant.
(3.) Undisputedly, the policy issued to UPSRTC as placed reliance upon by the appellant (insurer) stipulates a condition of having permit issued under Section 66 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It is on this premise that the appellant has argued violation of insurance policy by way of a statutory defence against its liability but permit issued under Section 103 of the Act is duly possessed by UPSRTC..;