1. Heard finally. Admit. By consent, taken up for final hearing. Original record, received, perused.

2. Ex Officio Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Udgir, on 7.9.2009, while deciding M.A.C.P.No.55/2008, dismissed the claim petition against original respondent No.3 (the New India Assurance Co. Ltd.), and hence feeling aggrieved by the said judgment, original respondent Govind, owner of the vehicle is before this Court.

3. FACTS:

Deceased was proceeding to Udgir on his vehicle (M-80) and had dash with Tempo bearing No.MH-26-B-3507, coming from opposite direction, and the deceased suffered, died at the spot. He was 50 years old, hale and hearty, an agriculturist, and family claimed that he had a good earning. On assessing the evidence, Rs. 2,75,000/- were awarded in favour of claimants with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum.

4. The gravamen of submission from Mr. Mundhe, learned Counsel for the appellant, owner of the vehicle is, exonerating the Insurance Company on erroneous assumption of type of vehicle, and incapacitation to drive the vehicle being not a competent person to carry the work, calls for interference.

5. Learned Counsel strenuously took me to the definition of Section 2(21), 2(43) and 2(14) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. These definitions are as under.

"2. Definitions.- In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, -

(21) "light motor vehicle" means a transport vehicle or omnibus the gross vehicle weight of either of which or a motor car or tractor or road-roller the unladen weight of any of which, does not exceed 7,500 kilograms;

(47) "transport vehicle" means a public service vehicle, a goods carriage, an educational institution bus or a private service vehicle;

(14) "goods carriage" means any motor vehicle constructed or adapted for use solely for the carriage of goods, or any motor vehicle not so constructed or adapted when used for the carriage of goods;

According to him, in the light of definition under Section 2(21), it being Light Motor Vehicle / a transport vehicle, the transport vehicle or omnibus is covered and gross vehicle weight of either of the same is not to exceed 7,500 kgs.

The distinction between a light motor vehicle and transport vehicle is evident; a transport vehicle may be a light motor vehicle but, for the purpose of driving the same, a distinct licence is required to be obtained. There is, again, a distinction between a transport vehicle and a passenger vehicle indicative in Section 14 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Sub-Section (2) of Section 14 provides for a duration of a period of three years in case of an effective licence to drive a transport vehicle whereas, in case of any other license, it may remain effective for a period of twenty years.

6. Learned Counsel has referred to the license of the driver Tanaji issued on 23.7.1990, which was renewed and validity of which was for fifteen years. According to him, the amendment dated 8th March, 2001, would be applicable prospectively and would not cover the license already held by Tanaji on 27.7.1990.

7. In order to stress his point, learned Counsel placed reliance to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of National Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Annappa Irappa Nasaria and others (2008 ACJ 721) and also to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 1999 SC 3181(1) (Ashok Gangadhar Maratha v. Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd.). In particular, he invited my attention to paragraph nos. 11 and 10 of the latter judgment. He has stressed, that in the light of the particular category of the vehicle, it did not invite mandatory requirement of compliance of Section 66 of the Motor Vehicles Act, and hence, any reference want of permit to the vehicle, has no relevance.

8. Mr.Mundhe has also referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of S.Iyyapanvs. United India Insurance Company Ltd. (2013(6) Mh.L.J.(6) page no.1). In S.Iyyappan, on facts of particular case, Hon'ble Supreme Court recorded in par