JUDGMENT :

HARSHA DEVANI, J.

1. The appellant - United India Insurance company Ltd. in this appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") has called in question the judgment and award dated 16th August, 2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajkot in M.A.C. Petition No.320 of 2009, whereby the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.6,37,000/- with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realisation thereof to the respondents No.1/1 and ½ - claimants, and has held the appellant - Insurance company along with the owner of the offending vehicle being truck bearing No.GJ-3-Y-6871 to be jointly and severally liable to pay the same.

2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the respondents No.1/1 and 1/2 filed a claim petition before the Tribunal stating that on 04.01.2009, the deceased Bhikhubhai Amarshibhai was walking on the road, near the Marketing Yard, when the driver of the truck bearing No.GJ-3-Y-6871 dashed against him, which resulted in his death. In connection with the death of the deceased, the respondents No.1/1 and 1/2 filed a claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- (rupees eight lakhs) under different heads.

3. The Tribunal upon appreciation of the evidence on record, found that the accident had occurred on account of the negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle and thereafter, assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- and the monthly prospective income at Rs.4,500/-. The Tribunal deducted one-third towards the personal expenses of the deceased and computed the monthly dependency loss at Rs.3,000/- and the annual dependency loss at Rs.36,000/-. Having regard to the fact that the age of the deceased was 33 years, the Tribunal applied a multiplier of 17 and awarded total dependency loss of Rs.6,12,000/-. The Tribunal also awarded Rs.10,000/- towards loss to estate, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses. In all, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.6,37,000/- to the respondents No.1/1 and 1/2 - claimants.

4. On the question of liability, before the Tribunal, on behalf of the appellant - insurance company, it was contended that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have a valid driving licence to drive a transport vehicle and as such there was a breach of the conditions of the policy. It was the case of the appellant that the driver of the offending vehicle was holding a licence to drive a 'light motor vehicle' only and as such, he did not have a licence to drive a 'heavy motor vehicle' and was, therefore, was not qualified to drive the offending vehicle. The Tribunal placed reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of S. Iyyapan v. United India Insurance Company Limited and another, (2013) 7 SCC 62, and held that on the question of driving licence, the insurance company has not been able to establish breach of the conditions of policy and that mere production of a certificate of licence of the driver is not sufficient to establish breach of the conditions of the policy. The Tribunal observed that the insurance policy was in existence at the time of the accident and held the insurance company liable to indemnify the insured. Being aggrieved, the insurance company is in appeal.

5. Mr. Maulik Shelat, learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the accident in question has occurred on 4th January, 2009 and the vehicle in question was a truck which was in the nature of a light motor vehicle. Referring to the extract of the driving licence of the driver of the offending vehicle, it was pointed out that such licence was for non-transport light motor vehicle and was valid from 28.05.2001 to 27.05.2021 and that there was no endorsement in the licence that the driver was authorised to drive a transport vehicle. It was submitted that the fact that the driver was not holding a valid licence has been pro