JUDGMENT :

Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Chamba allowed the claim petition preferred by the legal heirs of the deceased driver under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. The claimants were awarded a compensation amount of Rs.5,50,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing the petition till its realization. Aggrieved against this award dated 31.12.2014, the insurance company has preferred instant appeal mainly contending that :-

(a) the driver did not possess a valid and effective driving licence on the date of the accident.

(b) the driver is not a ‘third party’ within the meaning of Chapter XI of the Motor Vehicles Act. Therefore, claim petition under Section 163-A of the Act was not maintainable by his legal heirs. The appellant insurance company is not liable to indemnify the owner/insured with respect to liability towards the driver determined under Section 163-A of the Act.

2. Facts

2(i) A claim petition was preferred under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 (for short the Act) by the widow, two minor children and mother of the deceased Raj Kumar. Their case was that Raj Kumar was employed as a driver by respondent No. 5 on his Bolero Camper vehicle No. HP-73-2533. On 14.04.2013, Raj Kumar was driving this vehicle when the same met with an accident resulting into his death. FIR No. 14/13 in this regard was registered on 15.04.2013 at Police Station Bharmour, District Chamba under Sections 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. Deceased was 30 years old at the time of accident and earning monthly salary of Rs.3,300/-. Compensation amount of Rs.8,00,000/- in all was claimed.

2(ii) The appellant insurance company opposed the petition primarily on the ground that the driver of the vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving licence. That the vehicle was being plied in contravention of the terms of insurance policy. The compensation amount claimed was on the higher side.

2(iii) Respondent No. 5-owner of the vehicle in his reply admitted the averments made in the claim petition. He submitted that the vehicle was comprehensively insured with the appellant and, therefore, appellant was liable to indemnify the owner.

2(iv) The parties led evidence. On conclusion of the trial, learned Tribunal allowed the claim petition and awarded a fixed compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- each to the widow, minor son and the mother of the deceased. Rs.1,00,000/- was awarded to the minor daughter of the deceased. In all, compensation amount of Rs.5,50,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum was awarded in favour of claimants.

Aggrieved against the award, the insurance company has preferred instant appeal.

3. I have heard Mr. Jagdish Thakur, learned counsel for the appellant-insurer, Mr. Nimish Gupta, learned counsel for the owner/respondent No.5 as well as Mr. Abheyender Gupta, learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 4/claimants. For convenience, point-wise contentions and submissions of learned counsel for the parties alongwith observations in that regard are being considered hereinafter.

4. Driving Licence

4(i) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that deceased Raj Kumar was not holding a valid and effective driving licence. It was a case of light goods vehicle falling within the definition of ‘goods carriage’ under Section 2(14) of the Act. Under Section 14 of the Act, the driving licence for the transport vehicle remains effective only for a period of three years from the date of issue, whereas in the instant case, the driving licence (Ex. R-5) was reflected to be valid for the period 15.11.2012 to 14.11.2017 i.e. for a period of five years. The driving licence, therefore, was invalid. The insurer cannot be held liable to indemnify the insured.

Another argument raised in this regard by learned counsel for the appellant is that driving licence was issued by the State of Manipur, whereas PW-2/widow of the deceased had deposed that her husband had never gone outside Chamba ever since his marriage in 2005. This, ac