The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, Section 2(21) and its application to determine the eligibility of a driver holding a light motor vehicle licence to drive a specific vehicle, influencing the liability of compensation.

JUDGMENT

Maheshan Nagaprasanna, J. - Though the matter is listed for admission and since the issue lies in a narrow compass, with consent of learned Counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

2. The appellants-claimants have challenged the judgment and award dated 17.09.2016 passed in MVC No. 459/2015 by the Member, MACT and II Additional District Judge, Raichur (Tribunal for short), whereby the Tribunal has fastened the liability of compensation on the registered owner of the vehicle, respondent No. 1 herein, on the ground that the driver had an LMV licence and was not eligible to drive the JCB vehicle, which was the cause of the accident.

3. We have heard Sri Arunkumar Amargundappa, learned counsel for the appellants-claimants and Sri Subhash Mallapur, learned counsel for respondent No. 1.

4. Learned Counsel appearing for the claimants would submit that the findings of the Tribunal with regard to satisfying the award of compensation is erroneous, as the Tribunal has fastened the liability on the owner of the vehicle and not on the insurer. Learned Counsel for the claimants would further submit that the notional income of the deceased taken at Rs. 6,000/- per month is also erroneous as the year of the accident is 2015 and the notional income ought to have been taken at Rs. 8,000/- per month in place of Rs. 6,000/-.

5. The issue with regard to fastening the liability on the owner of the vehicle, on the ground that the driver of the offending had only a light motor vehicle licence and was driving a JCB, which is of a particular unladen weight, and the concept of the light motor vehicle driving licence qua the unladen weight and its validity for the purpose of the liability of the insurer is considered in the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Mukund Dewangan v. Oriental Insurance Company Limited reported in (2016) 4 SCC 298 . The Honble Supreme Court, considering the meaning of the definition light motor vehicle as defined in Section 2(21) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, at paragraph No. 59.2, has observed as follows:

'Para 59.2. 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 licence to drive 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 kg or a motor car or tractor or road roller, the unladen weight of which does not exceed 7500 kg?'

In terms of the afore-extracted judgment of the Honble Supreme Court, a transport vehicle, the gross vehicle weight of which does not exceed 7,500 kg. or a motor car or tractor or a road roller, the unladen weight of which does not exceed 7500 kg, can be driven by a person holding a light motor vehicle licence.

6. In terms of the law laid down by the Apex Court, the unladen weight of the JCB is less than 7500 kg. and the driver of the offending vehicle holding light motor vehicle licence was eligible to drive the JCB. Therefore, fastening the liability upon the owner of vehicle, is erroneous and warrants interference. Thus, the award of compensation will have to be satisfied by the respondent No. 1-insurer.

7. The Tribunal has taken the notional income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- per month for an accident that occurred in the year 2015. The notional income ought to have been taken is Rs. 8,000/- per month as it is now a standardized measure of practice by the Courts, both the High Courts and trial Courts to adopt the notional income as is adopted by the Lok Adalath for the disposal of appeals. The notional income that is adopted is mutually agreed to by both the insurer and the claimants. According to this, the notional income of the deceased will have to be taken at Rs. 8,000/- per month. The amount of compensation would be modified acco