The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the driver's eligibility to drive the vehicle and the absence of hazardous goods at the time of the accident.

JUDGMENT :

Vinit Kumar Mathur, J.

1. Applications for dispensing with the certified copies are allowed.

2. With the consent of the parties, all the above appeals are being decided finally by this common order as they arise out of the same accident in question.

3. The present appeals have been filed against the judgment and award dated 08.01.2020 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Labour Court Industrial Disputes Tribunal), Bikaner in Motor Accident Claim Case Nos. 249/2012, 345/2012, 62/2013, 59/2013, 60/2013 & 61/2013.

4. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeals are that a Diesel Tanker bearing registration No. RJ-19-1-G-5651 which was being driven by its driver Shafi Khan met with an accident with a pick-up vehicle bearing registration No. HP-33-B-0321 on 08.04.2012. The occupant of the pick-up vehicle, namely, Kalu Khan, Mohammad Deen, Yaaru Khan and Hanif Khan died on the spot and one Guddi and Jahiruddin were injured grievously. The injured were taken to the Hospital and during the course of treatment, Guddi also passed away.

5. In these circumstances, the claim petitions were filed before the Tribunal and following issues were framed:-

^^¼1½ vk;k iz'uxr okgu la[;k Vªd ua- R.J.19-1G-5651 ds pkyd foi{kh lQh [kka ds }kjk fnukad 08-04-12 dks lM+d vke Hkksfe;k th ds eafnj ds ikl 'kksHkklj ls igys ij mDr okgu dks mis{kk@mrkoysiu ls pyk dj dh xà nq?kZVuk es vkà pksVksa ds ifj.kkeLo#i dkyw[kka] eksgEen nhu] ;k# [kka ,oa xqM~Mh dh e`R;q gqà ;k tqgwjnhu ds pksVs vkÃ\

¼2½ vk;k foi{kh la[;k ;wukÃVsM bf.M;k ba';ksjsal da- fy- chek daiuh }kjk vius mYysf[kr dFku esa izkjfEHkd vkifRr;ksa ,oa fo'ks"k dFku ds e/; vius nkf;Ro ls eqDr gks ldrk gS] ugha rks bldk izHkko

¼3½ vk;k nkosnkj vius nkoksa@nkos esa vafdr iz'uxr jkf'k ;k vU; dksà U;k;lEer jkf'k ik ldrk gS] gk¡ rks dkSu dkSu nkosnkj fdruh&fdruh jkf'k] fdl&fdl foi{kh ls ,oa fdl izdkj ik ldrk gS\

After framing the above issues, the Tribunal decided the claim petitions vide its judgment and award dated 08.01.2020 (wrongly mentioned as 08.01.2010) after analyzing the evidence adduced from both the sides.

6. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, as well as the learned counsel for the respondents.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued before this Court that findings arrived at by the learned Tribunal on Issue No. 2 are perverse as the Tribunal has not appreciated the facts in the correct perspective. He contends that the Tribunal has failed to take into account that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding the "perfect driving license" and therefore, there was a breach of policy conditions and hence, the insurance company is not liable to pay the damages. He has pointed out that the conditions of the policy specifically provide that the vehicle insured with the appellant should be driven by a driver who is holding the "perfect driving license". Having not considered this aspect of the matter the Tribunal has erred while passing the judgment and award dated 08.01.2020.

8. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that it is of no consequence whether the vehicle which was insured with the appellant was carrying the "hazardous goods" or not at the time of accident. What is important is as to whether subject vehicle was meant for carrying the "hazardous goods". He emphasized that the vehicle insured was used for carrying the hazardous goods (although there was no Diesel (hazardous goods) at the time of accident) and therefore, all intents and purposes whether it is carrying hazardous goods or not. It will have the same implication even if the hazardous goods are not filled at the time of accident.

9. Mr. Sanjeev Johari, learned counsel for the appellant argued that the driver of the Tanker, namely, Shafi Khan was though having license to drive the heavy motor vehicles but the endorsement of the RTO on 09.04.2012 i.e. the day after the date of accident. This clearly shows that the driver of the Tanker was not holding the requisite qualifications of th