Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 421 (HP)

ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD v. GULSHAN KUMAR

2005-11-12

A.K.GOEL, NARINDER SINGH THAKUR, SAROJ SHARMA

body2005
ORDER Justice Arun Kumar Goel (Retd), President (Oral).: Only ground on which thrust was laid by Mrs. Meenaksashi Sharma at the time of hearing was that the driver of the vehicle, was not holding an effective and valid driving license to have driven the Mahindra Pick-up Jeep bearing registration No. HP-28-2425. It’s being insured and having met with accident, are the facts which were not disputed on behalf of the appellant. 2. Per Mrs. Sharma, in order to enable the driver to have driven the Pick-Up jeep, an endorsement from the appropriate Licensing Authority was required on drivers license whereby he could drive the Light Transport Vehicle (l.T.V.) with a view to support her submission regarding driving license Mrs. Sharma placed. reliance on a Division Bench judgment of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in the case of New India Assurance Company Ltd. Versus Shri Suraj Parkash & Others. Latest HLJ 2000 (HP) 555. This plea has been controverted by Mr. Saklani learned counsel for the respondent. According to him, driver was holding a valid and effective driving license where under he was authorized to have driven the vehicle when it met with accident. He placed reliance on the provisions of Section 2(21) and 2(47) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. According to him, admittedly the Pick-Up Jeep in question is a Light Motor Vehicle (L.M.V) and its gross vehicle weight did not exceed 7500 Kgs. 3. For examining the plea that the driver was not holding a valid and effective driving license, for ready reference, sub-section (21) and (47) of Section of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 are extracted here in below:- "(21) "Light Motor Vehicle" means a transport vehicle or omnibus the gross vehicle weight of either of which or a motor car or tractor or road-roller the unladen weight of any of which, does not exceed (7500) kilograms." XXX XXX XXX "(47) "Transport vehicle" means a public service vehicle, a goods carriage, an educational institution bus or a private service vehicle." 4. Mrs. Sharma also referred to Sections 3 and 10 of the Act supra in order to persuade us to allow this appeal with the support of Division Bench judgment in the case of New India Assurance Company Ltd. Versus Shri Suraj Parkash & others (supra). Mrs. Sharma also referred to Sections 3 and 10 of the Act supra in order to persuade us to allow this appeal with the support of Division Bench judgment in the case of New India Assurance Company Ltd. Versus Shri Suraj Parkash & others (supra). However, keeping in view the later Full Bench judgment of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Versus Dharmu and others, 2005 ACJ 1149, DB is not to be followed particularly when the latter decision of the Full Bench squarely not only covers the present case, but at the same time negatives the plea of Mrs. Sharma on behalf of the appellant. To Full Bench, following question had been referred: "When a person is holding an effective driving license within the meaning of sections 2(47), 3(1) and 10(2) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, whether such a licence still needs an endorsement authorizing him to drive a particular type of vehicle as has been held in the decision of the Division Bench of this court (reported in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v Suraj Prakash, 2001 ACJ 85 (HP)." 5.By referring to different provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 as well as after examination of the case law on the point, it was held as under: - "15. Viewed in the aforesaid perspective and the legal background, the answer to the question posed to us by the Division Bench, viz. whether such a Persian who is already possessed of an effective driving licence, authorizing him to drive a transport vehicle needs any additional endorsement authorizing him to drive a particular type of-vehicle, will be that, insofar as all types of vehicle falling within the definition of transport vehicle1 are concerned, in the light of the aforesaid observations made by us, such a licence does not need any other additional endorsement nor such a person needs any further, other or additional entitlement or authorization to drive any vehicle which comes within the definition and scope of the term transport vehicle1 as occurring in section 2(47), encompassing within itself all the attributes of such definition, including such-sections (17) and (35) of section 2 of the Motor Vehicles Act." 6. ln addition to this, reliance is also being placed on the decision of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Ashok Gangadhar Maratha Versus Oriental Insurance Co. ln addition to this, reliance is also being placed on the decision of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Ashok Gangadhar Maratha Versus Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. AIR 1999 SUPREME COURT 3181 and of this Commission in the case of Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Solan Filling Station, Latest HLJ 2002 (HP) (FB) 659. 7. No other point was urged. In view of the above discussion, there is no merit in this appeal and it is dismissed with no order as to costs. 8. All interim orders passed from time to time during the pendency of this appeal shall stand vacated forthwith. Office is directed to make copy of this order available to the parties free of cost as per rules.