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. 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 his professional duty. All the witnesses were cross-examined by the opposite parties and all the questions were related to the expenditure incurred by the claimant as well as his wife. There is no cross examination by the insurance company that the owner has violated any of the terms and conditions, mentioned in the insurance policy. All the witnesses were cross-examined by the opposite parties and all the questions were related to the expenditure incurred by the claimant as well as his wife. There is no cross examination by the insurance company that the owner has violated any of the terms and conditions, mentioned in the insurance policy. The Tribunal while deciding the case came to a conclusion that the original school certificate(Exhibit-9 series) reveal that the claimant Sri Haradhan Das was aged about 39 years at the time of the accident. It has also been proved that all the family members, comprising his wife and three minor daughters, were dependent upon the income of Sri Haradhan Das and he was the sole earning member of the family. Following the settled principles of law, the Tribunal has quantified the compensation to the tune of Rs. 19,21,922/- along with interest @8% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till the date of realization. Being aggrieved by and dis-satisfied with the said 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, the insurance company has preferred this appeal. 4. I have perused the entire record including the judgment passed by the Tribunal. 5. Mr. S. Lodh, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-insurance company has raised two grounds for challenge. Firstly, Mr. Lodh, learned counsel has urged whether the claimant Sri Haradhan Das was at all a driver at the time of the accident. Secondly, whether the driver of the offending truck being a possessor of licence to drive 'Light Motor Vehicle', could not have been permitted to drive the offending vehicle being classified as 'Medium Goods carrying vehicle'. Thus, the owner respondent no.2 in this appeal has violated one of the essential conditions of the insurance policy and for this, the appellant insurance company cannot be fastened with the liability to pay the compensation as fixed by the learned tribunal. 6. While dealing with the first point, I have meticulously and carefully gone through the evidence led by the parties. Exhibit 9, is the driving licence pertaining to the claimant, Sri Haradhan Das which was issued on 04.07.2000 and valid upto 07.01.2016. 6. While dealing with the first point, I have meticulously and carefully gone through the evidence led by the parties. Exhibit 9, is the driving licence pertaining to the claimant, Sri Haradhan Das which was issued on 04.07.2000 and valid upto 07.01.2016. Apart from that PW-3 is a Motor Sramik by profession for the last 42 years and was serving as a Line Secretary in Melaghar Motorstand for the last 42 years. He has categorically deposed that at the time of the accident, the claimant was a professional driver and due to the accident he became permanently disabled which incapacitated him to perform his professional duty. There is no contrary evidence, either led by the appellant-insurance company or by the owner of the vehicle. So, I repel the first ground of challenge of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant insurance company. 7. In view of the second ground raised as to whether the driver, being a possessor of licence to drive "Light Motor Vehicle" and later being authorized to drive "Transport Vehicle" can drive a "Heavy Goods Vehicle". 8. Another important question necessary to be discussed in this appeal is that what is the impact of substituting the subclauses 10 (e) to (h) of clause 2 of Section 10(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, which contains "Medium Goods Vehicle", "Medium Passenger Vehicle", "Heavy Goods Vehicle" and "Heavy Passenger Vehicle" by "Transport Vehicle"? 9. To find out the answer of the questions/issues, as set forth above, I may gainfully refer to a decision of the apex court in Mukund Dewangan v. Oriental Insurance Company Limited, reported in AIR 2017 SC 3668 , wherein a larger bench of the apex court has dealt with almost similar issues and decided in the following terms, which are necessary to be reproduced, in extenso: "1. In the reference, the main question involved is whether a driver who is having a licence to drive 'light motor vehicle' and is driving 'transport vehicle' of that class is required additionally to obtain an-endorsement to drive a transport vehicle? There is a conflict in the plethora of decisions of this Court.In Ashok Gangadhar Maratha v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (1999) 6 SCC 620 , S. Iyyapan v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr. (2013) 7 SCC 62 , Nagashetty v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. There is a conflict in the plethora of decisions of this Court.In Ashok Gangadhar Maratha v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (1999) 6 SCC 620 , S. Iyyapan v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr. (2013) 7 SCC 62 , Nagashetty v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. (2001) 8 SCC 56 , the view taken by this Court was that when a driver is holding a licence to drive 'light motor vehicle', he is competent to drive a 'transport vehicle' of that category without specific endorsement to drive the transport vehicle; whereas in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Prabhu Lal (2008) 1 SCC 696 , a view had been taken that before 2001 also, it was necessary for a driver possessing driving licence to drive light motor vehicle to obtain an endorsement to drive transport vehicle of that class; whereas in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Annappa Irappa Nesaria alias Nesargi & Ors. (2008) 3 SCC 464 , a distinction was made in the legal position which existed before 28.3.2001 i.e. the date of amendment of the form and subsequent thereto. It was opined that before 28.3.2001 there was no necessity for the holder of a licence to drive light motor vehicle to obtain an endorsement to drive transport vehicle of that class. He could drive transport vehicle of Light Motor Vehicle category on the basis of holding a licence to drive light motor vehicle. In New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Roshanben Rahemansha Fakir & Anr. (2008) 8 SCC 253 and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Angad Kol & Ors. (2009) 11 SCC 356 , the view had been taken that a driver holding licence to drive light motor vehicle in order to drive 'transport vehicle' of that class has to obtain a specific endorsement on licence authorizing him to drive a transport vehicle. 2. Following questions have been referred for decision to the larger Bench : 1. What is the meaning to be given to the definition of "light motor vehicle" as defined in Section 2(21) of the MV Act? Whether transport vehicles are excluded from it? 2. Whether 'transport vehicle' and 'omnibus' the "gross vehicle weight" of either of which does not exceed 7500 kg. would be a "light motor vehicle" and also motor car or tractor or a road roller, "unladen weight" of which does not exceed 7500 kg. Whether transport vehicles are excluded from it? 2. Whether 'transport vehicle' and 'omnibus' the "gross vehicle weight" of either of which does not exceed 7500 kg. would be a "light motor vehicle" and also motor car or tractor or a road roller, "unladen weight" of which does not exceed 7500 kg. and holder of a licence to drive the class of "light motor vehicle" as provided in Section 10(2)(d) would be competent to drive a transport vehicle or omnibus, the "gross vehicle weight" of which does not exceed 7500 kgs. or a motor car or tractor or road roller, the "unladen weight" which does not exceed 7500 kgs. ? 3. What is the effect of the amendment made by virtue of Act No. 54 of 1994 w.e.f. 14.11.1994 while substituting Clauses (e) to (h) of Section 10(2) which contained "medium goods vehicle", "medium passenger motor vehicle", "heavy goods vehicle" and "heavy passenger motor vehicle" by "transport vehicle"' Whether insertion of expression 'transport vehicle' Under Section 10(2)(e) is related to said substituted classes only or it also excluded transport vehicle of light motor vehicle class from the purview of Sections 10(2)(d) and 2(41) of the Act? 4. What is the effect of Amendment of Form 4 as to the operation of the provisions contained in Section 10 as amended in the year 1994 and whether the procedure to obtain the driving licence for transport vehicle of the class of "Light Motor Vehicle" has been changed " There is a conflict in the aforesaid decisions of this Court with respect to the legal position as to pre-amended and also the post-amendment legal position of the amendment made on 28.3.2001 in the Forms for driving licence. In order to answer the questions, it is necessary to consider the various provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 3. Section 3 of the Act deals with the necessity for driving licence which is extracted hereunder: "S.3. In order to answer the questions, it is necessary to consider the various provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 3. Section 3 of the Act deals with the necessity for driving licence which is extracted hereunder: "S.3. Necessity for driving licence.-- (1) No person shall drive a motor vehicle in any public place unless he holds an effective driving licence issued to him authorising him to drive the vehicle; and no person shall so drive a transport vehicle [other than 1[a motor cab or motor cycle] hired for his own use or rented under any scheme made under sub-section (2) of section 75] unless his driving licence specifically entitles him so to do. (2) The conditions subject to which sub-section (1) shall not apply to a person receiving instructions in driving a motor vehicle shall be such as may be prescribed by the Central Government." 1. Sub-section by Act 54 of 1994, section 3, for "a motor cab" (w.e.f. 14-111994)." It is apparent from the provisions contained in section 3 that it is necessary to have a licence to drive a motor vehicle in any public place and in order to drive a transport vehicle, the driving licence must specifically entitle him to do so. The question is what is the meaning to be given to 'transport vehicle' under Section 3. 4. Driving licence has been defined in section 2(10) of the Act. The section is extracted hereunder: "2 (10) "driving licence" means the licence issued by a competent authority under Chapter II authorising the person specified therein to drive, otherwise than as a learner, a motor vehicle or a motor vehicle of any specified class or description;" It is apparent from the definition of driving licence that licence is issued authorizing the person specified in the licence to drive a motor vehicle or a motor vehicle of any specified class or description. Significantly, the definition of 'driving licence' categorizes the licence of any specified class or description. 5. Section 10 deals with the Form and contents of the licences to drive. Section 10 as it stood before its amendment made in the year 1994 by virtue of Amendment Act 54 of 1994 is extracted hereunder: "10. Significantly, the definition of 'driving licence' categorizes the licence of any specified class or description. 5. Section 10 deals with the Form and contents of the licences to drive. Section 10 as it stood before its amendment made in the year 1994 by virtue of Amendment Act 54 of 1994 is extracted hereunder: "10. Form and contents of licences to drive.--(1) Every learner's licence and driving licence, except a driving licence issued Under Section 18, shall be in such form and shall contain such information as may be prescribed by the Central Government. (2) A learner's licence or, as the case may be, driving licence shall also be expressed as entitling the holder to drive a motor vehicle of one or more of the following classes, namely:- (a) motorcycle without gear; (b) motorcycle with gear; (c) invalid carriage; (d) light motor vehicle; (e) medium goods vehicle; (f) medium passenger motor vehicle; (g) heavy goods vehicle; (h) heavy passenger motor vehicle; (i) roadroller; (j) motor vehicle of a specified description."" It is apparent from the pre-amended provision which existed before the amendment made in the year 1994 that class or description of the vehicle for which licence used to be issued were categorized inter alia as light motor vehicle, medium goods vehicle, medium passenger motor vehicle, heavy goods vehicle, heavy passenger motor vehicle and motor vehicle of a specified description. Transport vehicle was not a separate class and it could be under section 10(1) (d) to (h). 6. The amendment had been made in section 10 by virtue of Amendment Act 54 of 1994. The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Amendment Act being relevant is extracted hereunder: "Amendment Act 54 of 1994 - Statement of Objects and Reasons.-The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) consolidated and rationalised various laws regulating road transport. The Act came into force with effect from 1st July 1989 replacing the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. 2. After the coming into force of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Government received a number of representations and suggestions from the state govt. transport operators and members of public regarding the inconvenience faced by them because of the operation of some of the provisions of the 1988 Act. A Review Committee was, therefore, constituted by the Government in March 1990 to examine and review the 1988 Act. 3. transport operators and members of public regarding the inconvenience faced by them because of the operation of some of the provisions of the 1988 Act. A Review Committee was, therefore, constituted by the Government in March 1990 to examine and review the 1988 Act. 3. The recommendations of the Review Committee were forwarded to the State Governments for comments and they generally agree with these recommendations. The Government also considered a large number of representations received, after finalisation of the Report of the Review Committee, from the transport operators and public for making amendments in the Act. The draft of the proposals based on the recommendation of the Review Committee and representations from the public were placed before the Transport Development Council for seeking their views in the matter. The important suggestions made by the Transport Development Council relate to, or are on account of,- (a) The introduction of newer type of vehicles and fast increasing number of both commercial and personal vehicles in the country. (b) Providing adequate compensation to victims of road accidents without going into long drawn procedure; (c) Protecting consumers' interest in Transport Sector; (d) Concern for road safety standards, transport of hazardous chemicals and pollution control; (e) Delegation of greater powers to State Transport Authorities and rationalising the role of public authorities in certain matters; (f) The simplification of procedures and policy liberalisation in the field of Road Transport; (g) Enhancing penalties for traffic offenders. 4. Therefore, the proposed legislation has been prepared in the light of the above background. The Bill inter alia provides for- (a) modification and amplification of certain definitions of new type of vehicles; (b) simplification of procedure for grant of driving licences; (c) putting restrictions on the alteration of vehicles; (d) certain exemptions for vehicles running on non-polluting fuels; (e) ceilings on individuals or Co. The Bill inter alia provides for- (a) modification and amplification of certain definitions of new type of vehicles; (b) simplification of procedure for grant of driving licences; (c) putting restrictions on the alteration of vehicles; (d) certain exemptions for vehicles running on non-polluting fuels; (e) ceilings on individuals or Co. holdings removed to curb "benami" holdings; (f) States authorised to appoint one or more State Transport Appellate Tribunals; (g) punitive checks on the use of such components that do not conform to the prescribed standards by manufactures, and also stocking/sale by the traders; (h) increase in the amount of compensation of the victims of hit and run cases; (i) removal of time limit for filling of application by road accident victims for compensation; (j) punishment in case of certain offences is made stringent; (k) a new pre-determined formula for payment of compensation to road accident victims on the basis of age/income, which is more liberal and rational. 5. The Law Commission in its 119th Report had recommended that every application for a claim be made to the Claims Tribunal having jurisdiction over the area in which the accident occurred or to the Claims Tribunal within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the claimant resides or carries on business or within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the Defendant resides, at the option of the claimant. The bill also makes necessary provision to give effect to the said recommendation. 7. The pre-amended provision of Section 10 contained the vehicles of ten kinds in Section 10(2) (a) to (j). In order to simplify the procedure for obtaining the licence, categories like medium goods vehicle, medium passenger motor vehicle, heavy goods vehicle, and heavy passenger motor vehicle were deleted and one category was inserted for these four kinds of vehicles in the form of "transport vehicle" in section 10(2)(e) so that drivers are not required to obtain the licence again and again for aforesaid four kinds of vehicles. The provision of section 10 after amendment made by Act 54 of 1994 is extracted hereunder: "10. Form and contents of licences to drive.--(1) Every learner's licence and driving licence, except a driving licence issued Under Section 18, shall be in such form and shall contain such information as may be prescribed by the Central Government. The provision of section 10 after amendment made by Act 54 of 1994 is extracted hereunder: "10. Form and contents of licences to drive.--(1) Every learner's licence and driving licence, except a driving licence issued Under Section 18, shall be in such form and shall contain such information as may be prescribed by the Central Government. (2) A learner's licence or, as the case may be, driving licence shall also be expressed as entitling the holder to drive a motor vehicle of one or more of the following classes, namely:- (a) motorcycle without gear; (b) motorcycle with gear; (c) invalid carriage; (d) light motor vehicle; (e) transport vehicle; (f) - (h) (i) road-roller; (j) motor vehicle of a specified description." 8. Before dilating further, it is necessary to consider other definitions as 'gross vehicle weight' has co-relation with the classification of vehicles into a light motor vehicle, medium goods vehicle, medium passenger motor vehicle, heavy goods vehicle, and heavy passenger motor vehicle.The definitions of aforesaid class of vehicles are extracted hereunder: "2. Definitions. (16) "heavy goods vehicle" means any goods carriage the gross vehicle weight of which, or a tractor or a road-roller the unladen weight of either of which, exceeds 12,000 kilograms; (17) "heavy passenger motor vehicle" means any public service vehicle or private service vehicle or educational institution bus or omnibus the gross vehicle weight of any of which, or a motor car the unladen weight of which, exceeds 12,000 kilograms; (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 2[7500] kilograms; (23) "medium goods vehicle" means any goods carriage other than a light motor vehicle or a heavy goods vehicle; (24) "medium passenger motor vehicle" means any public service vehicle or private service vehicle, or educational institution bus other than a motor cycle, invalid carriage, light motor vehicle or heavy passenger motor vehicle;" 9. The definition of 'gross vehicle weight' and 'unladen weight' are also significant as the expression finds a place in the aforesaid definitions. The definition of 'gross vehicle weight' and 'unladen weight' are also significant as the expression finds a place in the aforesaid definitions. Said definitions in sections 2(15) and 2(48) are as under: "2(15) "gross vehicle weight" means in respect of any vehicle the total weight of the vehicle and load certified and registered by the registering authority as permissible for that vehicle; "2 (48) "unladen weight" means the weight of a vehicle or trailer including all equipments ordinarily used with the vehicle or trailer when working, but excluding the weight of a driver or attendant; and where alternative parts or bodies are used the unladen weight of the vehicle means the weight of the vehicle with the heaviest such alternative part or body; 10. 'Transport vehicle' has been referred in section 2(47) of the Act thus: "2 (47) "transport vehicle" means a public service vehicle, a goods carriage, an educational institution bus or a private service vehicle;" Various expressions find a place in the aforesaid definition of 'transport vehicle'. Each of them has been defined separately and they are extracted thus: "2 (11) "educational institution bus" means an omnibus, which is owned by a college, school or other educational institution and used solely for the purpose of transporting students or staff of the educational institution in connection with any of its activities; 2 (14) "goods carriage" means any motor vehicle constructed or adapted for use solely for the carriage of goods, or any motor vehicle not so constructed or adapted when used for the carriage of goods; 2 (33) "private service vehicle" means a motor vehicle constructed or adapted to carry more than six persons excluding the driver and ordinarily used by or on behalf of the owner of such vehicle for the purpose of carrying persons for, or in connection with, his trade or business otherwise than for hire or reward but does not include a motor vehicle used for public purposes; 2 (35) "public service vehicle" means any motor vehicle used or adapted to be used for the carriage of passengers for hire or reward, and includes a maxicab, a motor cab, contract carriage, and stage carriage;" 11. 'Motor car', 'omnibus' and 'tractor' have been defined in the Act thus: "2(26) "motor car" means any motor vehicle other than a transport vehicle, omnibus, road roller, tractor, motor cycle or invalid carriage; 2(29) "omnibus" means any motor vehicle constructed or adapted to carry more than six persons excluding the driver; 2(44) "tractor" means a motor vehicle which is not itself constructed to; carry any load (other than equipment used for the purpose of propulsion), but excludes a road-roller;" 12. Section 9 of the Act deals with grant of driving licence. Any person can apply for driving licence unless he is disqualified for holding or obtaining a driving licence. The application has to be filed in such form as may be prescribed by the Central Government as provided in section 9(2). The applicant has to pass a test also, as provided in section 9(3). Itis further provided in section 9(4) that a person applying for the licence to drive a transport vehicle shall possess such minimum educational qualification as may be prescribed by the Central Government. Licensing authority may refuse to issue a licence to a habitual criminal or a habitual drunkard or who is habitually addicted to any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance or whose licence had been revoked earlier. 13. Prior to amendment in 1994 licence for transport vehicle was clearly covered as per section 10(2)in five categories, i.e., Section 10(2)(d) light motor vehicle, Section 10(2)(e) medium goods vehicle, Section 10(2) (f) medium passenger motor vehicle, Section 10(2)(g) heavy goods vehicle and Section 10(2)(h) heavy passenger motor vehicle. The licence for 'light motor vehicle' has been provided in section 10(2)(d). The expression 'transport vehicle' has been inserted by virtue of Amendment Act 54/1994 in section 10(2)(e) after deleting four categories or classes of vehicles, i.e. medium goods vehicle, medium passenger motor vehicle, heavy goods vehicle, and heavy passenger motor vehicle. Earlier Section 10did not contain the separate class of transport vehicles. 14. The definition of 'light motor vehicle' makes it clear that for 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 kgs. 'Gross vehicle weight' has been defined in section 2(15). The motor car or tractor or road roller, the unladen weight of any of which does not exceed 7500 kgs. 'Gross vehicle weight' has been defined in section 2(15). The motor car or tractor or road roller, the unladen weight of any of which does not exceed 7500 kgs. as defined in section 2(48) of the Act, are also the light motor vehicle. No change has been made by Amendment Act of 54/94 in the provisions contained in sections 2(21) and 10(2)(d) relating to the light motor vehicle. The definition of 'light motor vehicle' has to be given full effect to and it has to be read with section 10(2)(d) which makes it abundantly clear that 'light motor vehicle' is also a 'transport vehicle', the gross vehicle weight or unladen weight of which does not exceed 7500 kgs. as specified in the provision. Thus, a driver is issued a licence as per the class of vehicle i.e. light motor vehicle, transport vehicle or omnibus or another vehicle of other categories as per gross vehicle weight or unladen weight as specified in section 2(21) of the Act. The provision of section 3 of the Act requires that a person in order to drive a 'transport vehicle' must have authorization. Once a licence is issued to drive light motor vehicle, it would also mean specific authorization to drive a transport vehicle or omnibus, the gross vehicle weight or motor car, road roller or tractor, the unladen weight of which, as the case may be, does not exceed 7500 kg. The insertion of 'transport vehicle' category in section 10(2)(e) has no effect of obliterating the already defined category of transport vehicles of the class of light motor vehicle. A distinction is made in the Act of heavy goods vehicle, heavy passenger motor vehicle, medium goods vehicle and medium passenger motor vehicle on the basis of 'gross vehicle weight' or 'unladen weight' for heavy passenger motor vehicle, heavy goods vehicle, the weight, as the case may be, exceed 12000 kg. Medium goods vehicle shall mean any goods carriage other than a light motor vehicle or a heavy goods vehicle; whereas 'medium passenger motor vehicle' means any public service vehicle or private service vehicle or educational institution bus other than a motorcycle, invalid carriage, light motor vehicle or heavy passenger motor vehicle. Medium goods vehicle shall mean any goods carriage other than a light motor vehicle or a heavy goods vehicle; whereas 'medium passenger motor vehicle' means any public service vehicle or private service vehicle or educational institution bus other than a motorcycle, invalid carriage, light motor vehicle or heavy passenger motor vehicle. Thus, the newly incorporated expression 'transport vehicle' in section 10(2)(e) would include only the vehicles of the category as defined in section 2(16) - heavy goods vehicle, section 2(17) - heavy passenger motor vehicle, section 2(23) -medium goods vehicle and section 2(24) medium passenger motor vehicle, and would not include the 'light motor vehicle' which means transport vehicle also of the weight specified in Section 2(21)". 10. Again, the apex court at paragraph 45 and 46 in Mukund Dewangan (supra) has held as under: "45. Transport vehicle has been defined in section 2(47) of the Act, to mean a public service vehicle, a goods carriage, an educational institution bus or a private service vehicle. Public service vehicle has been defined in section 2(35) to mean any motor vehicle used or adapted to be used for the carriage of passengers for hire or reward and includes a maxicab, a motor cab, contract carriage, and stage carriage. Goods carriage which is also a transport vehicle is defined in section 2(14) to mean a motor vehicle constructed or adapted for use solely for the carriage of goods, or any motor vehicle not so constructed or adapted when used for the carriage of goods. It was rightly submitted that a person holding licence to drive light motor vehicle registered for private use, who is driving a similar vehicle which is registered or insured, for the purpose of carrying passengers for hire or reward, would not require an endorsement as to drive a transport vehicle, as the same is not contemplated by the provisions of the Act. It was also rightly contended that there are several vehicles which can be used for private use as well as for carrying passengers for hire or reward. When a driver is authorised to drive a vehicle, he can drive it irrespective of the fact whether it is used for a private purpose or for purpose of hire or reward or for carrying the goods in the said vehicle. It is what is intended by the provision of the Act, and the Amendment Act 54/1994. 46. When a driver is authorised to drive a vehicle, he can drive it irrespective of the fact whether it is used for a private purpose or for purpose of hire or reward or for carrying the goods in the said vehicle. It is what is intended by the provision of the Act, and the Amendment Act 54/1994. 46. Section 10 of the Act requires a driver to hold a licence with respect to the class of vehicles and not with respect to the type of vehicles. In one class of vehicles, there may be different kinds of vehicles. If they fall in the same class of vehicles, no separate endorsement is required to drive such vehicles. As light motor vehicle includes transport vehicle also, a holder of light motor vehicle licence can drive all the vehicles of the class including transport vehicles. It was preamended position as well the post-amended position of Form 4 as amended on 28.3.2001. Any other interpretation would be repugnant to the definition of "light motor vehicle" in section 2(21) and the provisions of section 10(2)(d), Rule 8 of the Rules of 1989, other provisions and also the forms which are in tune with the provisions. Even otherwise the forms never intended to exclude transport vehicles from the category of 'light motor vehicles' and for light motor vehicle, the validity period of such licence hold good and apply for the transport vehicle of such class also and the expression in Section 10(2)(e) of the Act 'Transport Vehicle' would include medium goods vehicle, medium passenger motor vehicle, heavy goods vehicle, heavy passenger motor vehicle which earlier found place in section 10(2)(e) to (h) and our conclusion is fortified by the syllabus and rules which we have discussed. Thus we answer the questions which are referred to us thus: (i) 'Light motor vehicle' as defined in section 2(21) of the Act would include a transport vehicle as per the weight prescribed in section 2(21) read with section 2 (15) and 2(48). Such transport vehicles are not excluded from the definition of the light motor vehicle by virtue of Amendment Act No.54/1994. (ii) A transport vehicle and omnibus, the gross vehicle weight of either of which does not exceed 7500 kg. would be a light motor vehicle and also motor car or tractor or a road roller, 'unladen weight' of which does not exceed 7500 kg. (ii) A transport vehicle and omnibus, the gross vehicle weight of either of which does not exceed 7500 kg. would be a light motor vehicle and also motor car or tractor or a road roller, 'unladen weight' of which does not exceed 7500 kg. and holder of a driving licence to drive class of "light motor vehicle" as provided in section 10(2)(d) is competent to drive a transport vehicle or omnibus, the gross vehicle weight of which does not exceed 7500 kg. or a motor car or tractor or road-roller, the "unladen weight" of which does not exceed 7500 kg. That is to say, no separate endorsement on the licence is required to drive a transport vehicle of light motor vehicle class as enumerated above. A licence issued under section 10(2)(d) continues to be valid after Amendment Act 54/1994 and 28.3.2001 in the form. (iii) The effect of the amendment made by virtue of Act No.54/1994 w.e.f. 14.11.1994 while substituting clauses (e) to (h) of section 10(2) which contained "medium goods vehicle" in section 10(2)(e), medium passenger motor vehicle in section 10(2)(f), heavy goods vehicle in section 10(2)(g)and "heavy passenger motor vehicle" in section 10(2)(h) with expression 'transport vehicle' as substituted in section 10(2)(e) related only to the aforesaid substituted classes only. It does not exclude transport vehicle, from the purview of section 10(2)(d) and section 2 (41) of the Act i.e. light motor vehicle. (iv) The effect of amendment of Form 4 by insertion of "transport vehicle" is related only to the categories which were substituted in the year 1994 and the procedure to obtain driving licence for transport vehicle of class of "light motor vehicle" continues to be the same as it was and has not been changed and there is no requirement to obtain separate endorsement to drive transport vehicle, and if a driver is holding licence to drive light motor vehicle, he can drive transport vehicle of such class without any endorsement to that effect". [Emphasis supplied] 11. In the case at hand, the driver of the offending vehicle was driving a vehicle classified as "Heavy Goods Vehicle" (HGV) and from the perusal of his driving licence it is revealed that he was authorized to drive "Light Motor Vehicles" w.e.f. 29.06.2010, but, later on by virtue of an endorsement, he was authorized to drive "Transport Vehicle" w.e.f. 24.09.2012. In the case at hand, the driver of the offending vehicle was driving a vehicle classified as "Heavy Goods Vehicle" (HGV) and from the perusal of his driving licence it is revealed that he was authorized to drive "Light Motor Vehicles" w.e.f. 29.06.2010, but, later on by virtue of an endorsement, he was authorized to drive "Transport Vehicle" w.e.f. 24.09.2012. The accident was occurred on 28.11.2014, that is, after entitling him to drive 'Transport Vehicle'. 12. Having regard to the legal position, as emanated on the strength of the above decision, I am of the considered view, that, when an endorsement was made in a driving licence of the driver authorizing him to drive 'Transport Vehicle', that means, the driver of the vehicle was authorized to drive 'Heavy Goods Vehicle' as the licence to drive 'Transport Vehicle' include 'Heavy Goods Vehicle', even unladen weight of which exceeds 12,000 kgs., though, in the present case, the unladen weight of the vehicle is below 7,500 kgs. 13. The consequence of endorsement of 'Transport Vehicle' in the driving licence, is that, a driver is entitled to drive the category of vehicles which were substituted by Amendment Act 54 of 1994 where the 4(four) classes of vehicles mentioned in subclauses, 10(2)(e) (Medium Goods Vehicle), 10(2)(f) (Medium Passenger Vehicle), 10 (20(f) (Heavy Goods Vehicle) and 10(2)(g) (Heavy passenger Motor Vehicle) have been deleted and these classes of vehicles are substituted by only one class of vehicle with nomenclature and expression 'Transport Vehicle' in Section 10(2)(e). 14. So, the impact of Act 54 of 1994 is that the 'Transport Vehicle' includes 4(four) classes of vehicles, as stated above. Thus, the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, that the driver of the offending vehicle i.e. respondent no. 3, being a holder of licence to drive 'Light Motor Vehicle' had no valid driving licence to drive 'Heavy Goods Vehicle' at the relevant point of time is hereby repelled and the liability has been saddled with the insurance company-appellant to pay the compensation to the claimant-respondent. Further, it is clarified that there is no need of having a separate endorsement in the licence in regard to his eligibility to drive 'Heavy Goods Vehicle' since the licence of the claimant was endorsed with the authorization to drive 'transport vehicle'. 15. Further, it is clarified that there is no need of having a separate endorsement in the licence in regard to his eligibility to drive 'Heavy Goods Vehicle' since the licence of the claimant was endorsed with the authorization to drive 'transport vehicle'. 15. There is no material which calls for interference with the quantum of compensation as has been determined following the principles as settled in a plethora of decisions passed by the Hon'ble apex court as well as by various High Courts. 16. Therefore, I find no merit in the appeal preferred by the appellant-insurance company and hence, it is dismissed. 17. However, there shall be no order as to costs.