The validity of the driving license is a consideration under a contract of insurance, and the insurer can raise the issue in the proceedings under the Employees Compensation Act.

JUDGMENT :

1. The appellant/insurance company has challenged award dated 14.12.2009 passed by the Commissioner under Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (Assistant Labour Commissioner), Jammu (hereinafter to be referred as the Commissioner), whereby a sum of Rs. 4,30,560/- along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent has been awarded in favour of the claimants/respondent Nos. 1 to 4. The liability of paying the compensation has been fastened upon the appellant/insurance company.

2. It appears that on 20.05.2006, Balwan Singh, the predecessor in interest of the claimants, who was employed with respondent No. 5, owner of the Gas Tanker bearing No. HR-38-J-9707, while driving the said Gas Tanker suffered an accident on reaching Daha Khani, W. No. 5, Keri Bari, District Chitwan (Nepal). As a result of the accident, Balwan Singh died. The accident had arisen out of and in the course of employment of the deceased with respondent No. 5 and at the time of the accident, the offending vehicle was carrying Liquefied Petroleum Gas(LPG) from Baruni Oil Refinery. The deceased was 22 years old at the time of the accident.

3. The claim petition was contested by the owner (respondent No. 5) and the insurer, the appellant herein. Respondent No. 5, the owner of the offending Tanker admitted that the deceased was employed with it and it was pleaded that the vehicle in question was insured with the appellant/insurance company at the time of the accident. The appellant/insurance company raised a number of defences and one of the defences raised by the appellant/insurance company was that the deceased-Balwan Singh was not holding an effective and valid licence at the time of the accident inasmuch as he was not authorized to drive a vehicle carrying hazardous goods. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Commissioner framed the following issues:

1. “Whether the deceased namely Balwan Singh falls under the definition of Workman as prescribed under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (OPP)

2. Whether he met with an accident during and in the course of his employment with Respondent No. 1(OPP)

3. What was age and wages of the deceased at the time of death (OPP)

4. Relief.”

4. After recording evidence of the parties, the Commissioner after taking the wages of the deceased as Rs. 4,000/- per month and his age as 26 years, assessed the compensation in favour of the claimants as Rs. 4,30,560/-. Although no issue was framed by the Commissioner as regards the validity of the driving license of the deceased, yet evidence was led by the parties before the Commissioner on this aspect of the matter and the Commissioner also dealt with this aspect of the matter in the impugned award by holding that there was no requirement of possession of a valid driving license in a case where compensation is being sought under the provisions of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923.

5. The appellant/insurance company has challenged the impugned award passed by the Commissioner to the extent liability to satisfy the award has been fastened upon it. It has been claimed that the Commissioner was not correct in holding that plea regarding validity of the driving license cannot be raised in a proceeding under Employees Compensation Act. It has also been contended that without an endorsement on the driving license, authorising its holder to drive a vehicle carrying hazardous goods, it cannot be said that a person driving such a vehicle is holding an effective and valid driving license.

6. The first question of law that arises for determination in this appeal is as to whether an insurer is entitled to raise the plea of validity of driving license in a proceeding under Employees Compensation Act. The other question that arises for determination is as to whether a person driving a vehicle carrying hazardous goods is competent to drive such a vehicle in the absence of an endorsement on his driving license authorising him to drive such a vehicle.

7. I have heard learned counsel for the pa