ORDER

This Misc. Appeal is filed by the owner and driver of the offending vehicle being aggrieved of the award dated 31.03.2015 by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balaghat in MACC No. 172/2013, wherein on account of non-availability of driving license to drive a two wheeler with which the accident took place an award has been passed to pay the compensation and recover it from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle.

Ms. Priyal Rahangdale submits that the impugned award is faulty. Since, the driver of the offending vehicle was having license to drive a four wheeler, therefore, he was automatically entitled to drive a two wheeler.

Shri Aditya Narayan Sharma dispute this fact and submits that this aspect has been dealt with by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Zaharulnisha & Ors. (2008)12 SCC 385 and by this Court in the case of Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Satya Prakash Bhadoria & Ors. 2018 SCC OnLine MP 1809 and so also in M.A. No. 1500/2017 (Rajjo Bai Vs. Vijay Patel & Ors.) decided on

28.08.2023.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, it is no more in dispute that Driver of the vehicle should possess a Driving License of the specific category of vehicle which was being driven by the Driver of the vehicle at the time of the accident. This is the ratio of law laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Zaharulnisha & Ors. (supra)

and followed by this Court in the aforesaid judgments.

Therefore, in view of this specific judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court since driver of the offending vehicle was admittedly not having a license to drive a two wheeler, there is no illegality in the impugned award calling for interference.

Appeal fails and is dismissed. Let the record of the trial Court be sent back.

(VIVEK AGARWAL)

JUDGE Amitabh