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

2015 Supreme(Del) 53

High Court of Delhi
G.P. MITTAL, J.
Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Sajjan Lal & Others - Respondent
MAC.APP. No. 603 of 2013
Decided on : 12-01-2015

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant:Arpan Wadhawan, Manjusha Wadhwa, Advocates.
For the Respondents: Nemo.

Headnote:

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 10, 11, 14 - Accident - Compensation - Recovery - Compensation of Rs. 36,341/- in favour of Respondent no.1. for having suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident - Claims Tribunal declined to grant any recovery rights to the Appellant on the ground that since the driver possess a driving licence to drive LMV, yet by driving a Light Goods Vehicle (LGV) which is also a Light Motor Vehicle (LMV) - Insured cannot be said to have breached the terms of the insurance policy - Requirement of holding a licence for the type of vehicle which is involved in the accident - If the driver of the offending vehicle possessed a licence to drive a Non-Transport Vehicle and if he is found to be driving a taxi, it will be treated to be breach of the terms and conditions of the policy - Appeal is liable to be allowed - Appellant Insurance Company would be entitled to recovery rights in execution of this very judgment without having recourse to the independent recovery proceedings - Applications stand disposed of.

Judgment :-

G.P. Mittal, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 01.05.2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby while awarding the compensation of Rs.36,341/- in favour of Respondent no.1. Sajjan Lal for having suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 17.07.2009, the Claims Tribunal declined to grant any recovery rights to the Appellant on the ground that since the driver possess a driving licence to drive LMV (Non-Transport), yet by driving a Light Goods Vehicle (LGV) which is also a Light Motor Vehicle (LMV), the insured cannot be said to have breached the terms of the insurance policy.

2. The relevant observations of the Claims Tribunal in para 32 of the judgment are extracted hereunder:-

“32. Respondent no.3 has not proved that holding of driving license by respondent no.1 which did not authorise him to drive a LGV was the factor which contributed to the cause of accident or that the driving license as possessed by respondent no.1 was the fundamental cause of the accident. In the circumstances, I find no force in the contention of respondent no.3 that respondent no.3 is not liable to indemnify the insurer…..”

3. This Court in Future General India Insurance Company Limited v. Mohd. Ibrahim & Ors., MAC APP.837/2011 decided on 09.10.2012 dealt in detail the requirement of holding a licence for the type of vehicle which is involved in the accident and opined that if the driver of the offending vehicle possessed a licence to drive a Non-Transport Vehicle (LMV-NT) and if he is found to be driving a taxi, it will be treated to be breach of the terms and conditions of the policy. In paras 5 to 24 of the report this Court held as under:-

“5. Learned counsel for the First Respondent, however, urges that since the delivery van was LMV, Respondent No.2 was competent to drive the same on the basis of the licence for LMV (NT) possessed by him.

6. Section 10 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act) deals with the Form and contents of licences to drive. Section 11 of the Act deals with additions to driving licence to drive any other class or description of vehicle in addition to the one which the holder is competent to drive. Section 14 of the Act deals with the currency of licences to drive motor vehicles. Sections 10, 11 and 14 of the Act are extracted hereunder:-

“10. Form and contents of licences to drive.

(1) Every learner's licence and driving licence, except a driving licence issued under section 18, shall be in such form and shall contain such information as may be prescribed by the Central Government.

(2) A learner's licence or, as the case may be, driving licence shall also be expressed as entitling the holder to drive a motor vehicle of one or more of the following classes, namely:-

(a) motor cycle without gear;

(b) motor cycle with gear;

(c) invalid carriage;

(d) light motor vehicle;

1[(e) transport vehicle;]

(i) road-roller;

(j) motor vehicle of a specified description.

11. Additions to driving licence.

(1) Any person holding a driving licence to drive any class or description of motor vehicles, who is not for the time being disqualified for holding or obtaining a driving licence to drive any other class or description of motor vehicles, may apply to the licensing authority having jurisdiction in the area in which he resides or carries on his business in such form and accompanied by such, documents and with such fees as may be prescribed by the Central Government for the addition of such other class or description of motor vehicles to the licence.

(2) Subject to such rules as may be prescribed by the Central Government, the provisions of section 9 shall apply to an application under this section as if the said application was for the grant of a licence under that section to drive the class or description of motor vehicles which the applicant desires to be added to his licence.

14. Currency of licences to drive motor vehicles.

(1) A learner's licence issued under this


















































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
whatsapp-icon Back to top