SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(SC) 894

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Arun Mishra, Amitava Roy and Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ.
Mukund Dewangan - Appellant
Versus
Oriental Insurance Company Limited - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 5826 of 2011 With Special Leave Petition (C) No.32828 of 2010, Special Leave Petition (C) No.32833 of 2010, Special Leave Petition (C) No.32835 of 2010, Special Leave Petition (C) Nos.8709-8710 of 2014, Special Leave Petition (C) Nos.8712-8713 of 2014, Special Leave Petition (C) No.20072 of 2015, Special Leave Petition (C) No.3300 of 2015, Special Leave Petition (C) No.3302 of 2015, Special Leave Petition (C) Nos.887-890 of 2013, Special Leave Petition (C) No.16082 of 2012, Special Leave Petition (C) Nos.28455-28456 of 2013, Civil Appeal No.6379 of 2013, Special Leave Petition (C) No.13008 of 2014, Special Leave Petition (C) Nos.15759-15760 of 2014, Special Leave Petition (C) Nos.14333-14334 of 2014, Special Leave Petition (C) No.6429 of 2015, Special Leave Petition (C) Nos.36364-36365 of 2014, Special Leave Petition (C) No.15924 of 2015, Civil Appeal No.9990 of 2014, Special Leave Petition (C) Nos.8704-8706 of 2014, Civil Appeal Nos.4068-4069 of 2012, Special Leave Petition (C) No.32827 of 2010, Special Leave Petition (C) No.15881 of 2016, Special Leave Petition (C) No.28778 of 2016, Special Leave Petition (C) No.2492-2493 of 2016, Civil Appeal No.8992 of 2012, Special Leave Petition (C) No.25373 of 2014
Decided On : 03-07-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :R. Balasubramanium, Ms. Anindita Pujari, Ms. Kavita Bhardwaj, Ms. Sakshi Mittal, Yash Pal Dhingra, Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, V.N. Raghupathy, Balaji Srinivasan, H.K. Chaturvedi, Mrs. Rani Chhabra, Ms. Priyanka, Dr. (Mrs. ) Vipin Gupta, P.K. Jain, Jay Kishor Singh, Raj Singh Rana, Uday B. Dube, Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad, Akshat Shrivastava, Arup Banerjee, Rajinder Mathur, Tanuj Bagga, Sumit Attri, Manjunath Meled, Ms. Vijayalaxmi V., Anil Kumar, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, Ms. Meenakshi Midha, Chander Shekhar Ashri for (M/s. Law Associates), Sanjay Kumar Singh, G. Balaji, C.K. Rai, Varinder Kumar Sharma, Ms. Meera Mathur, Dr. Meera Agarwal, Anis Ahmed Khan, Viresh B. Saharya, M.K. Dua, Javed Mahmud Rao, Nand Ram, Manish P. Singh, Ajay Singh, Dr. Nafis A. Siddiqui, Ms. Nidhi, Garvesh Kabra, Anish Kumar Gupta, R.K. Rajwanshi, Chandra Shekhar Suman, Ms. Deep Shikha Bharti, Ms. Sakshi Mittal, Ms. Neerja Sachdeva, Ms. Meera Mathur, Advocates.

A driver who is having a licence to drive 'light motor vehicle' and is driving 'transport vehicle' of that class is not required additionally to obtain an endorsement to drive a transport vehicle.

Headnote:

Whether a driver who is having a licence to drive 'light motor vehicle' and is driving 'transport vehicle' of that class is required additionally to obtain an endorsement to drive a transport vehicle?

Fact of the Case:

None

Finding of the Court:

A driver who is having a licence to drive 'light motor vehicle' and is driving 'transport vehicle' of that class is not required additionally to obtain an endorsement to drive a transport vehicle.

Issues: 1. What is the meaning to be given to the definition of "light motor vehicle" as defined in Section 2(21) of the MV Act? 2. Whether 'transport vehicle' and 'omnibus' the "gross vehicle weight" of either of which does not exceed 7500 kg. would be a "light motor vehicle" and also motor car or tractor or a road roller, "unladen weight" of which does not exceed 7500 kg. and holder of a licence to drive the class of "light motor vehicle" as provided in Section 10(2)(d) would be competent to drive a transport vehicle or omnibus, the "gross vehicle weight" of which does not exceed 7500 kgs. or a motor car or tractor or road roller, the "unladen weight" of which does not exceed 7500 kgs. ? 3. What is the effect of the amendment made by virtue of Act No. 54 of 1994 w.e.f. 14.11.1994 while substituting Clauses (e) to (h) of Section 10(2) which contained "medium goods vehicle", "medium passenger motor vehicle", "heavy goods vehicle" and "heavy passenger motor vehicle" by "transport vehicle" Under Section 10(2)(e) is related to said substituted classes only or it also excluded transport vehicle of light motor vehicle class from the purview of Sections 10(2)(d) and 2(41) of the Act? 4. What is the effect of Amendment of Form 4 as to the operation of the provisions contained in Section 10 as amended in the year 1994 and whether the procedure to obtain the driving licence for transport vehicle of the class of "Light Motor Vehicle" has been changed ?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The definition of 'light motor vehicle' under Section 2(21) of the Act includes transport vehicle also, a holder of light motor vehicle licence can drive all the vehicles of the class including transport vehicles. 2. A transport vehicle and omnibus, the gross vehicle weight of either of which does not exceed 7500 kg. would be a light motor vehicle and also motor car or tractor or a road roller, 'unladen weight' of which does not exceed 7500 kg. and holder of a driving licence to drive class of "light motor vehicle" as provided in section 10(2)(d) is competent to drive a transport vehicle or omnibus, the gross vehicle weight of which does not exceed 7500 kg. or a motor car or tractor or road-roller, the "unladen weight" of which does not exceed 7500 kg. That is to say, no separate endorsement on the licence is required to drive a transport vehicle of light motor vehicle class as enumerated above. 3. The effect of the amendment made by virtue of Act No.54/1994 w.e.f. 14.11.1994 while substituting clauses (e) to (h) of section 10(2) which contained "medium goods vehicle" in section 10(2)(e), medium passenger motor vehicle in section 10(2)(f), heavy goods vehicle in section 10(2)(g) and "heavy passenger motor vehicle" in section 10(2)(h) with expression 'transport vehicle' as substituted in section 10(2)(e) related only to the aforesaid substituted classes only. It does not exclude transport vehicle, from the purview of section 10(2)(d) and section 2(41) of the Act i.e. light motor vehicle. 4. The effect of amendment of Form 4 by insertion of "transport vehicle" is related only to the categories which were substituted in the year 1994 and the procedure to obtain driving licence for transport vehicle of class of "light motor vehicle" continues to be the same as it was and has not been changed and there is no requirement to obtain separate endorsement to drive transport vehicle, and if a driver is holding licence to drive light motor vehicle, he can drive transport vehicle of such class without any endorsement to that effect.

Final Decision: A driver who is having a licence to drive 'light motor vehicle' and is driving 'transport vehicle' of that class is not required additionally to obtain an endorsement to drive a transport vehicle.

Judgement Key Points

The legal interpretation established in the document clarifies that a driver holding a licence to drive a 'light motor vehicle' is authorized to operate a 'transport vehicle' of that class without requiring an additional endorsement. This conclusion is based on the comprehensive reading of the relevant statutory provisions, including the definitions and classifications within the Motor Vehicles Act and the associated rules (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)


JUDGMENT :

Arun Mishra, J.

In the reference, the main question involved is whether a driver who is having a licence to drive 'light motor vehicle' and is driving 'transport vehicle' of that class is required additionally to obtain an endorsement to drive a transport vehicle? There is a conflict in the plethora of decisions of this Court. In Ashok Gangadhar Maratha v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (1999) 6 SCC 620, S. Iyyapan v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr. (2013) 7 SCC 62, Nagashetty v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. (2001) 8 SCC 56, the view taken by this Court was that when a driver is holding a licence to drive 'light motor vehicle', he is competent to drive a 'transport vehicle' of that category without specific endorsement to drive the transport vehicle; whereas in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Prabhu Lal (2008) 1 SCC 696, a view had been taken that before 2001 also, it was necessary for a driver possessing driving licence to drive light motor vehicle to obtain an endorsement to drive transport vehicle of that class; whereas in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Annappa Irappa Nesaria alias Nesargi & Ors. (2008) 3 SCC 464, a distinction was made in the legal position which existed before 28.3.2001 i.e. the date of amendment of the form and subsequent thereto. It was opined that before 28.3.2001 there was no necessity for the holder of a licence to drive light motor vehicle to obtain an endorsement to drive transport vehicle of that class. He could drive transport vehicle of Light Motor Vehicle category on the basis of holding a licence to drive light motor vehicle. In New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Roshanben Rahemansha Fakir & Anr. (2008) 8 SCC 253 and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Angad Kol & Ors. (2009) 11 SCC 356, the view had been taken that a driver holding licence to drive light motor vehicle in order to drive 'transport vehicle' of that class has to obtain a specific endorsement on licence authorizing him to drive a transport vehicle.

2. Following questions have been referred for decision to the larger Bench :

1. What is the meaning to be given to the definition of "light motor vehicle" as defined in Section 2(21) of the MV Act? Whether transport vehicles are excluded from it?

2. Whether 'transport vehicle' and 'omnibus' the "gross vehicle weight" of either of which does not exceed 7500 kg. would be a "light motor vehicle" and also motor car or tractor or a road roller, "unladen weight" of which does not exceed 7500 kg. and holder of a licence to drive the class of "light motor vehicle" as provided in Section 10(2)(d) would be competent to drive a transport vehicle or omnibus, the "gross vehicle weight" of which does not exceed 7500 kgs. or a motor car or tractor or road roller, the "unladen weight" of which does not exceed 7500 kgs. ?

3. What is the effect of the amendment made by virtue of Act No. 54 of 1994 w.e.f. 14.11.1994 while substituting Clauses (e) to (h) of Section 10(2) which contained "medium goods vehicle", "medium passenger motor vehicle", "heavy goods vehicle" and "heavy passenger motor vehicle" by "transport vehicle"? Whether insertion of expression 'transport vehicle' Under Section 10(2)(e) is related to said substituted classes only or it also excluded transport vehicle of light motor vehicle class from the purview of Sections 10(2)(d) and 2(41) of the Act?

4. What is the effect of Amendment of Form 4 as to the operation of the provisions contained in Section 10 as amended in the year 1994 and whether the procedure to obtain the driving licence for transport vehicle of the class of "Light Motor Vehicle" has been changed ?"

There is a conflict in the aforesaid decisions of this Court with respect to the legal position as to pre-amended and also the post-amendment legal position of the amendment made on 28.3.2001 in the Forms for driving licence. In order to answer the questions, it i




































































































































































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top