JUDGEMENT

This appeal is filed against the order and decree dated 17.09.2012 passed in M.V.O.P.No.23 of 2009 on the file of the Court of the District Judge-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, at Mahabubnagar.

2. This appeal is preferred by wife and children of the deceased Mohammed Khaled Quershi claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-(Rupees Ten Lakhs only) as he met with an accident and died on 12.11.2008. It is contended that while Mohammed Khaled Quershi who is the deceased was proceeding on his Hero Honda motor cycle bearing No.AP-22/N-2089 towards market, in the mean time the offending vehicle Mini Bus bearing No.AP-22/V-2337 driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner at high speed gave dash to his motor bike from back side, as a result of which the deceased sustained grievous injuries all over the body and died while shifting to Hospital. In this regard a criminal case was registered against the driver of the offending vehicle in Crime No.132/08 by the Police, I Town, Mahabubnagar under Section 304-A of IPC and charge sheet was filed under Ex.A.6.

3. It was contended by the respondents that the driver of the offending bus was not holding valid and effective driving license at the time of the accident. The trial Court examined R.Ws.1 and 2 and filed Exs.B.1 to B.9 their behalf of respondents and examined P.Ws.1 to 3 and marked Exs.A.1 to A.9 on behalf of petitioners.

4. In this case it was held that the person who possess medium transport license should alone is supposed to drive the Mini school bus. The driving license authority has issued license to the offending vehicle driver to drive only L.M.V and T&T and has transport endorsement, but he did not possess M.T.V. Transport endorsement, as such no liability can be fastened against respondent No.2/Company.

5. Insurance Company examined R.W.1 in support of his contention respondent company also examined the employee of R.T.A Office, Mahabubnagar as R.W.2 and he stated that driver having license to drive the LMV tractor and trailer and he was issued with transport driving license on 21.10.2010 (subsequent to accident). As per registration extract of vehicle Ex.A.7 the vehicle is a medium transport vehicle. Considering the oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court exonerated the insurance company and directed respondent No.1 to deposit the amount. Aggrieved by the said order M/s. Pragathi Educational Society who engaged the driver filed an appeal.

6. Heard arguments of both sides and perused the record.

7. It is mainly contended that there are minor and inconsequential deviations with regard to licensing conditions as such insurer would not be allowed to avoid liability and the driver of the light motor vehicle is permitted to drive the vehicle which is 7,500 kgs. Unladen weight. The mini school bus involved in the accident is 8,250 kgs. There is no much difference in the weight of the vehicle. The owner of the vehicle has no knowledge about these minute differences and relied upon citation in “National Insurance Company Ltd., v. Saran Singh and others”1 and requested this Court to set aside the judgment passed by the trial Court.

8. Admittedly, the driver of crime vehicle is having a driving license to drive only L.M.V and T&T but as he was driving the mini school bus it was contended that he has no MTV driving license. The school authorities contended that they verified whether driver is having license or not but they do not know MTV driving license is required and also stated that they only minor deviations and LMV driver can drive the vehicle which having 7,500 kgs unladen weight but mini school bus involved in the accident is 8,250 kgs and there is no much difference in the weight of the vehicle. No doubt it is for the school authority to verify whether driver is having valid driving license or not. In 1 2004 (3) SCC 297 this case, driver submit the driving li