IMPORTANT POINT
Death in motor accident - Breach or non-compliance of statutory requirement to undergo a training course to upskill driving efficiency and product safety cannot be brushed aside as a technical breach not contributing to accident.

JUDGMENT :

(K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.)

1. Leave granted.

2. The above four appeals are filed from the orders in two first appeals by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, arising from two separate orders of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and the orders in two Review Applications filed from the aforesaid orders in first appeals, both of which stood rejected.

3. Before us, the appeals are filed by the owner of the offending vehicle involved in the motor accident, in which the breadwinners of the claimants’ family, who were respectively; riding a bicycle and a pedestrian, died in the accident involving an oil tanker. The First Information Report was registered against the driver of the oil tanker which was rashly and negligently driven, by reason of which it hit the bicyclist and the pedestrian. The Tribunal found negligence based on the FIR registered and the deposition of CW2, who was an eye- witness. Ext. C1-FIR and Ext.C3-Charge Sheet points to the rash and negligent driving of the oil tanker, which stands corroborated by the deposition of CW2: eye- witness. The awards were passed in both the claim petitions, the quantum of which has not been challenged by the owner of the offending vehicle; the oil tanker, either in the High Court or this Court. Having fixed the quantum, the Tribunal directed the insurance company to pay the award amounts and recover it from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle, since the driver did not have a valid licence to drive a vehicle carrying dangerous and hazardous goods. Appeals were filed before the High Court by the owner of the oil tanker, against the order to pay and recover. The review applications were also filed against the very same direction by the owner of the oil tanker; the offending vehicle, both of which stood rejected.

4. Before us, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant only argued on the direction to pay and recover as issued to the insurance company. It was argued based on decisions of different High Courts that as long as there is no case that the accident occurred due to the dangerous and hazardous goods carried in the vehicle, the absence of an endorsement as required under Rule 9 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989¹[“the Rules], would not result in a finding of breach of the policy conditions. The vehicle at the time of accident was not carrying any dangerous or hazardous goods, is also the submission. Moreover, the learned Counsel for the appellant, also pointed out that there was a certificate produced in the first appeal which indicated that the driver had undergone the three days training course, which equipped him to drive the offending vehicle even when it was loaded and the absence of an endorsement is a venial breach.

5. The learned Counsel for the insurance company pointed out that under Rule 14 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988²[“the Act”], the driver of a goods vehicle carrying dangerous and hazardous goods is required to undergo a training as prescribed under Rule 9 of the Rules and is further required to get an endorsement of such training having been undergone, in the transport vehicle license possessed by him. The driver who was examined before the Tribunal clearly accepted that there was no such endorsement made in his driving licence. The driver also stated that at the time of the accident, there was oil carried in the tanker. The respondent-insurer submits that the High Court has rightly declined reliance on the training certificate produced in the first appeal, finding it to be not acceptable as per Order 41 Rule 27 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908³[“the C.P.C.”] and further, emphasised the absence of an endorsement made in the driving licence.

6. We have looked at Section 14 of the Act, the proviso to which; as it stood at the time of the accident, restricted the validity of a license to drive a transport vehicle carrying goods of dangerous and hazardous nature to one year and required a one day refresher course in the prescribed syllabus, fo