The contention of the owner that the vehicle was driven by his minor brother without his consent or knowledge cannot be accepted as the owner of a vehicle must take adequate care to ensure that only a duly licensed and competent person drives the vehicle.
8. It is often said that responsibility is the silent shadow that follows every act of freedom. In the case of the young, whose impulses race faster than their understanding, that shadow must be guided by the hands of their elders. Thus, upon the elder rests the solemn duty to restrain the minor from venturing into paths not yet meant for their age particularly, the act of driving a vehicle, which demands both maturity and lawful permission. The elder must serve as both guardian and guide, ensuring that the thrill of youth does not overrun the boundaries of safety and law. The minor’s safety, and the safety of others, depends upon the vigilance of the elder who understands that care is the truest expression of responsibility.
9. In the present case, both the owner and the driver are real brother. It is inconceivable that the owner was unaware of his brother’s use of the vehicle. Even assuming otherwise, the duty to keep the vehicle safe and not accessible to an unlicensed person lies squarely on the owner. Hence, the owner cannot escape liability by merely stating lack of consent.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (JABALPUR BENCH)
Misc. Appeal No. 376 of 2007
Decided On: 10.11.2025
Branch Manager United India Insu. Comp. Vs. Maneesh Kumar Singrore and Ors.
Hon’ble Judges/Coram:
Himanshu Joshi, J.
Citation: 2025:MPHC-JBP:57157,MANU/MP/3600/2025.
Read full judgment here: Click here.
