Back
2006 Supreme(UK) 133
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
Arindam Lodh, J.
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED — Appellant
Vs.
SRI HARADHAN DAS AND OTHERS — Respondent
MAC APP 1 of 2017
Decided on : 04-01-2019
S. Lodh, Advocate, for the Appellant;
Somik Deb and S. Adhikari, Advocates, for the Respondents
A driver authorized to drive a 'Transport Vehicle' is also authorized to drive a 'Heavy Goods Vehicle'. No separate endorsement is required in the driver's licence for driving a 'Heavy Goods Vehicle' if the licence is endorsed with 'Transport Vehicle'.
Headnote:
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 166 - The claimant filed a claim application under this section to claim compensation for injuries sustained in a road accident. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 10(2)(d) - The court referred to this section to determine that a 'Light Motor Vehicle' includes a 'Transport Vehicle' and that a driver authorized to drive a 'Transport Vehicle' is also authorized to drive a 'Heavy Goods Vehicle'. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Amendment Act 54 of 1994 - The court referred to this amendment to explain the impact of substituting the classes of vehicles with the category of 'Transport Vehicle' in Section 10(2)(e). The court held that the amendment includes 'Heavy Goods Vehicle' in the category of 'Transport Vehicle' and that no separate endorsement is required in the driver's licence for driving a 'Heavy Goods Vehicle' if the licence is endorsed with 'Transport Vehicle'.
Fact of the Case:
The claimant, a driver, filed a claim application under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation for injuries sustained in a road accident. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded compensation to the claimant, which was challenged by the insurance company in this appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The court examined the evidence and concluded that the claimant was a driver at the time of the accident and that the driver of the offending vehicle was authorized to drive a 'Transport Vehicle', which includes 'Heavy Goods Vehicle'. The court referred to a previous Supreme Court decision to support this interpretation. The court also held that there was no need for a separate endorsement in the driver's licence to drive a 'Heavy Goods Vehicle'.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a driver authorized to drive a 'Transport Vehicle' is also authorized to drive a 'Heavy Goods Vehicle'. The court relied on the definition of 'Transport Vehicle' and the amendment made to the Motor Vehicles Act in 1994. The court also clarified that no separate endorsement is required in the driver's licence for driving a 'Heavy Goods Vehicle'.
Result: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the compensation awarded to the claimant by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.
JUDGMENT :
Arindam Lodh, J. - This is an appeal preferred by the National Insurance Company Limited challenging the judgment and award dated 10.05.2016 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sonamura, West Tripura Judicial District in case No. T.S. (MAC) 16 of 2015 praying for dismissal of the award to the tune of Rs. 19,21,922/- only alongwith interest @8% per annum w.e.f. the date of filing of the claim petition i.e. 12.06.2015.
2. Heard Mr. S. Lodh, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. Somik Deb, learned counsel appearing for the claimant-respondent no.1.
3. The facts of the case, in brief, are that one Sri Haradhan Das, a driver by profession by filing a claim application under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short hereinafter referred to as the MV Act), claimed compensation amounting to Rs. 28,95,000/-. It is stated in the claim application that on 28.11.2014 at about 5.00 hours, when he alongwith his wife was performing morning walk at East Chandigarh area of Kakraban-Melaghar road, at that time one truck bearing registration no. TRL 2760 loaded with bamboo dashed him from behind and fell in the road side lunga. Due to the accident, he sustained severe injuries. He was immediately taken to Melaghar hospital and from there he was referred to AGMC & GBP hospital, where he was admitted as an indoor patient from 28.11.2014 to 16.01.2015. In course of treatment, his left leg was amputated above the knee.
On receipt of the claim application, the appellant insurance company as well as the owner of the vehicle by filing their respective written objection contested the claim application. In course of the proceeding, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has examined as many as 4 witnesses including the doctor namely Dr. Dipti Bikash Roy as PW-4. Neither the insurance company nor the owner of the vehicle made their presence in the witness box.
On 25.02.2015, the District Disability Medical Board, West Tripura District, Agartala, Tripura issued a Permanent Disablement Certificate no. DDRC/OH/6049/2019 dated 25.02.2015 declaring the claimant-respondent no.1 permanently disabled upto 80%. In course of the proceeding, the documents relating to the vehicle bearing no. TRL 2760 were produced and marked as exhibits, which were found valid and genuine.
The claimant, respondent no.1 in this appeal and his wife Smt. Sabitri Das in their evidence have stated that Haradhan Das was aged about 39 years at the time of the accident and he was earning Rs. 10,000/- per month as a driver. They have produced many medical examination reports and prescriptions of doctors and bills and vouchers indicating the total medical expenses which they incurred in course of treatment of the claimant.
PW-3, Sri Thakur Chand Barman in his examination-inchief has corroborated the statement of PW 1 and 2 that Sri Haradhan Das, claimant (PW-1) was a professional motor vehicle driver and was known to him. Due to the accident he has lost one of his legs and has become permanently disabled and he is unable to perform his professional duty as a motor vehicle driver. It is worthy to mention that PW-3 was a Motor Sramik by profession for the last 42 years and he has been serving as a Line Secretary in Melaghar motor stand for the last 4 years.
PW-4, Dr. Dipti Bikash Roy in his deposition has stated that on 25.02.2015 he was discharging as Member Secretary and Locomotor Specialist, District Disability Board, West Tripura District, Agartala. On that date their Board issued one permanent disablement certificate bearing no. DDRC/OH/6049/2015 dated 25.02.2015 in favour of the claimant, Sri Haradhan Das who was found permanently disabled upto 80% due to amputation of his left leg above the knee upto lower '/3rd of thigh. The doctor has categorically stated that Sri Haradhan Das will not be able to perform his professional duty as a motor vehicle driver in future and due to such disablement, Sri Haradhan Das has lost his 100% capacity to perform
