Mr. K. Kannan, J. (Oral):- The appeal by the owner-cum-driver is on the ground that the Insurance Company was bound to indemnify the owner/ insured for the consequences of a motor accident. This right of indemnity was denied on the ground that the driver had driving licence to drive two-wheeler and a heavy transport vehicle but the vehicle involved in the accident at the relevant time was only a light motor vehicle.

2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant contends that there are at least three Courts, namely, Karnataka, Jammu and Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh which have taken a view that possession of licence to drive HTV must be seen as sufficiently qualifying a person to drive a LMV as well and that the mechanism to drive in both the categories of vehicles being the same, the Insurance Company shall be bound to honour the commitment to the insured. The judgments are Srinivasagowda and another Versus Sannamma and others, (2011) ACC 416; National Insurance Company Limited Versus Zeba and others, [2010(2) Law Herald (Acc.) 837] : 2010 (2) AICJ 419; New India Assurance Company Limited Versus Dharmu and others, 2005 ACJ 1149, respectively.

3. The learned co