The main legal point established is that the liability of the Insurance Company to pay compensation is determined by the driver's possession of a valid and effective driving license for the type of vehicle involved in the accident, as defined under the Motor Vehicles Act.

( 1 ) IN this appeal preferred by the Insurance Company under Section 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act'), the correctness of the judgment and award dated 16th August, 2001 passed in mvc No. 1 of 1998 on the file of the Court of the Principal District judge and Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dharwad (for short, 'the mact), awarding compensation of Rs. 3,14,800/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of claim petition till its realization, in favour of respondents 1 to 4 who are the claimants in MVC No. 1 of 1998 is called in question.

( 2 ) ON 4-12-1997 at about 6. 45 p. m. a tempo bearing Registration No. KA-25/6976 driven by its driver Moinuddin, by name, in high speed and rash and negligent manner without observing the traffic rules dashed against the deceased Yellappa Talawar alias Walikar near Navalur railway Station on Poona-Bangalore National Highway No. 4 as a result of which Yellappa Talawar died on the spot.

( 3 ) THE legal representatives of the deceased alleging that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the tempo filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Act claiming compen- sation. The respondent 5 in this appeal who is the owner of the motor vehicle involved in the accident and who was impleaded as respondent 1 in the MVC, despite service of notice, remained ex parts. The appellant- insurance Company which was impleaded as respondent 2 in the MVC filed its objection to the claim petition inter alia contending that the driver of the tempo was not having a valid and effective driving licence to drive any transport vehicle on the date of accident and that he was having licence to drive light motor vehicles only and, therefore, the owner of the vehicle is guilty of the breach of conditions of insurance policy and in that view of the matter, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay compensation and consequently, the claim petition filed by the legal representatives of the deceased should be dismissed in limine.

( 4 ) THE MACT in the light of the pleadings of the parties have framed the following issues for trial:"1. Whether the petitioners prove that the accident that took place on 4-12-1997 at about 6. 45 p. m. on Poona-Bangalore Road near navalur Railway Station was due to the driving of the tempo bearing Registration No. KA-25/6976 by its driver? 2. Whether the petitioners further prove that due to the accident in question, the deceased Yallappa sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot? 3. Whether the petitioners prove that they being the L. Rs of the deceased, are entitled for compensation? If so, to what extent and from whom?"

( 5 ) THE claimants, in support of their claim, examined the first claimant as P. W. 1 and also examined one Basappa Mallappa Ingalalli as p. W. 2 and produced 7 documents marked as Exs. P. 1 to P. 7. On behalf of the Insurance Company, a Senior Assistant, Siddalingaswamy basayya Kombal, by name, working in the appellant-Insurance Company was examined as R. W. 1 and Assistant, RTO, Dharwad was also examined as R. W. 2 and produced 5 documents marked as Exs. R. 1 to R. 5.

( 6 ) THE MACT having considered oral and documentary evidence answered issues 1 to 3 in the positive and awarded compensation of Rs. 3,14,800/ -. In this appeal filed by the Insurance Company, it is contended that the liability to pay compensation should not have been imposed on the Insurance Company inasmuch as the driver of the vehicle involved in the accident did not have valid and effective licence to drive the transport vehicle on the date of the accident and since the insured vehicle was driven by the driver of the insurer in breach of conditions of Insurance Policy, liability to pay compensation to third parties could not have been imposed on the Insurance Company. Therefore, the only question that arises for decision in this appeal is whether the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation aw