Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 943 (HP)

Shyam Lal v. Urmila Devi

2019-07-12

SURESHWAR THAKUR

body2019
JUDGMENT : SURESHWAR THAKUR, J. 1. The learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Shimla, H.P., under a common verdict, respectively pronounced, upon, MAC Petition No. 38-S/2 of 2013, MAC Petition No. 37-S/2 of 2013, and, upon, MAC Petition No. 39-S/2 of 2013, on 8.12.2017, hence, therethrough determined respectively, vis-a-vis, the claimants concerned, compensation amounts, respectively borne, in sums, of Rs.45,000/-, Rs.70,079/-, and, Rs.36,000/-, and, thereon levied interest at the rate of 9% per annum, and, it was ordered to commence from the date of filing of the apposite claim petition, and, upto realization(s) thereof. However, the learned tribunal, upon, making findings adversarial, to the owner of the offending vehicle, vis-a-vis, the issue appertaining, to, the driver of the offending vehicle, at the relevant time, holding a valid and effective driving licence, to drive the offending vehicle concerned, (a) thereafter proceeded to apply, the, principle of pay and recovery, (b) wherethrough, the insurer of the offending vehicle, was mandated, to initially satisfy, the award, (c) and, thereafter liberty stands preserved, vis-a-vis, it hence to recover, the, compensation amounts, in accordance with law, rather, from the owner of the offending vehicle. The owner of the offending vehicle, is hence, aggrieved, by the common verdict, recorded on, 8.12.2017, by the learned tribunal, respectively upon, MAC Petition No. 38-S/2 of 2013, MAC Petition No. 37-S/2 of 2013, and, upon, MAC Petition No. 39-S/2 of 2013, hence, therefroms, has, reared the instant afore FAOs, before this Court, wherethrough, he, rather strives to cast hence onslaught(s) thereto. 2. The bedrock of the validity, of the afore contested pronouncement, rendered by the learned tribunal concerned, stands rested, upon, Ex.RW2/A, (i) exhibit whereof, comprises a photo copy of the driving licence, held by the driver of the offending vehicle, namely, one Shaukat Ali, (ii) besides therealongwith, hence, a, perusal of a copy of the RC appertaining to the offending vehicle, and, borne in Ex.RW1/A, is, also obviously imperative. Initially, a perusal of the apposite RC, embodied in Ex. RW1/A, unfolds, qua the offending vehicle, standing registered, as a heavy goods vehicle, and, though a perusal of Ex.RW2/A, also carries an echoing, vis-a-vis, the driver of the offending vehicle, hence holding, the, requisite authorization rather to drive, a, transport vehicle, and, duration of the afore authorization, is therein reflected, to commence from 22.5.2010 and, end, on 21.05.2013. RW1/A, unfolds, qua the offending vehicle, standing registered, as a heavy goods vehicle, and, though a perusal of Ex.RW2/A, also carries an echoing, vis-a-vis, the driver of the offending vehicle, hence holding, the, requisite authorization rather to drive, a, transport vehicle, and, duration of the afore authorization, is therein reflected, to commence from 22.5.2010 and, end, on 21.05.2013. However, the ill-fated mishap, involving the offending vehicle, occurred subsequent, to the expiry of the afore authorization, bestowed upon the driver of the offending vehicle, inasmuch, as it occurred, on 26.05.2013, and, uncontrovertedly thereat one Shaukat Ali, the, driver of the offending vehicle, (iii) obviously in the interregnum, since its expiry, and, till the happening of the ill-fated mishap, did not obtain, its renewal from the Motor Licencing Authority concerned. Furthermore, there is no application for renewal of Ex.RW2/A, for therethrough the afore Shaukat Ali, hence ensuring, its, apt renewal, (iv) rather also outside the statutory mandate encapsulated in the proviso, to Section 14 of the Motor Vehicles Act, inasmuch, as the requisite strivings, for renewal of Ex.RW2/A being recoursed either within 30 days, from its expiry or outside 30 days, reiteratedly, no apt, afore statutory strivings, hence, stood recoursed, by the afore Shaukat Ali. The provisions of Section 15 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act):- "15 Renewal of driving licences. - (1) Any licensing authority may, on application made to it, renew a driving licence issued under the provisions of this Act with effect from the date of its expiry: Provided that in any case where the application for the renewal of a licence is made more than thirty days after the date of its expiry, the driving licence shall be renewed with effect from the date of its renewal: Provided further that where the application is for the renewal of a licence to drive a transport vehicle or where in any other case the applicant has attained the age of forty years, the same shall be accompanied by a medical certificate in the same form and in the same manner as is referred to in sub-section (3) of section 8, and the provisions of subsection (4) of section 8 shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to every such case as they apply in relation to a learner's licence. (2) An application for the renewal of a driving licence shall be made in such form and accompanied by such documents as may be prescribed by the Central Government. (3) Where an application for the renewal of a driving licence is made previous to, or not more than thirty days after the date of its expiry, the fee payable for such renewal shall be such as may be prescribed by the Central Government in this behalf. (4) Where an application for the renewal of a driving licence is made more than thirty days after the date of its expiry, the fee payable for such renewal shall be such amount as may be prescribed by the Central Government: Provided that the fee referred to in sub-section (3) may be accepted by the licensing authority in respect of an application for the renewal of a driving licence made under this sub-section if it is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by good and sufficient cause from applying within the time specified in such-section (3): Provided further that if the application is made more than five years after the driving licence has ceased to be effective, the licensing authority may refuse to renew the driving licence, unless the applicant undergoes and passes to its satisfaction the test of competence to drive referred to in sub-section (3) of section 9. (5) Where the application for renewal has been rejected, the fee paid shall be refunded to such extent and in such manner as may be prescribed by the Central Government. (5) Where the application for renewal has been rejected, the fee paid shall be refunded to such extent and in such manner as may be prescribed by the Central Government. (6) Where the authority renewing the driving licence is not the authority which issued the driving licence it shall intimate the fact of renewal to the authority which issued the driving licence." (a) though enjoin the afore Shaukat Ali, to prefer an application, for renewal of the driving licence, before the RLA concerned, either before its expiry or within 30 days from its expiry, and, upon, his striving hence begetting success, (b) thereupon, the benefit of the first proviso, to Section 15 of the Act, being bestowable upon him, (c) with a further statutory legal corollary, vis-a-vis, his renewal hence operating from the date, of its expiry, (d) and, hence, also covering the period whereat, the relevant mishap rather involving the offending vehicle, hence, happening, (e) besides carrying, the, concomitant effect, qua it being, hence legally facile, for the owner of the offending vehicle, to ensure, the fastening of apposite indemnificatory liability, upon, the insurer thereof. However, as, aforestated with the requisite application, being neither placed on record, nor the RLA concerned, hence, making an order of renewal(s) thereof, (f) thereupon, the afore first proviso to Section 15 of the Act, is prima facie aptly concluded, by the learned tribunal concerned, to, fail to beget its statutory clout, hence, operate vis-a-vis, the hereat driving licence, and, thereafter, it prima facie aptly adopted, the, principle of pay and recover. 3. However, for the reasons to be assigned hereafter, the afore reasoning, as meted, in the impugned award, by the learned tribunal concerned, is, extremely fragile, and, is amenable rather for outright rejection. (a) The learned tribunal, abysmally failing, to notice the apt provisions, borne in Section 14 of the Act, provisions whereof stand extracted hereinafter:- "14. Currency of licences to drive motor vehicles.- (1) A learner's licence issued under this Act shall, subject to the other provisions of this Act, be effective for a period of six months from the date of issue of the licence. Currency of licences to drive motor vehicles.- (1) A learner's licence issued under this Act shall, subject to the other provisions of this Act, be effective for a period of six months from the date of issue of the licence. (2) A driving licence issued or renewed under this Act shall, - (a) in the case of a licence to drive a transport vehicle, be effective for a period of three years: Provided that in the case of licence to drive a transport vehicle carrying goods of dangerous or hazardous nature be effective for a period of one year and renewal thereof shall be subject to the condition that the driver undergoes one day refresher course of the prescribed syllabus; and (b) in the case of any other licence,- (i) if the person obtaining the licence, either originally or on renewal thereof, has not attained the age of 3[fifty years] on the date of issue or, as the case may be, renewal thereof,- 3[fifty years] on the date of issue or, as the case may be, renewal thereof,- (A) be effective for a period of twenty years from the date of such issue or renewal; or (B) until the date on which such person attains the age of 3[fifty years], 3[fifty years]," whichever is earlier; [(ii) if the person referred to in sub-clause (i), has attained the age of fifty years on the date of issue or as the case may be, renewal thereof, be effective, on payment of such fee as may be prescribed, for a period of five years from the date of such issue or renewal:] Provided that every driving licence shall, notwithstanding its expiry under this sub-section continue to be effective for a period of thirty days from such expiry." A perusal of sub-section (2)(a) thereof, makes, obvious eruptions, (i) vis-a-vis, the statutory authorisation, to drive a transport vehicle, remaining alive for a period of three years, and, the last proviso borne therein, also, makes graphic echoings, vis-a-vis, every driving licence, dehors, its longevity surviving, only upto, the period mandated, in the apposite sub-section, hence, whereunderneath, the last proviso, rather occurs, inasmuch, as, vis-a-vis, a licence falling, within, the domain of sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Act, (ii) rather being statutorily protected, to, continue to hold longevity, upto, a period of 30 days, from the date of expiry of the afore driving licence, and, appertaining, to, authorisation to drive a transport vehicle, in category whereof, the, ill fated vehicle hence evidently rather falls. 4. Even though, the learned counsel, appearing for the insurer, has contended, that, with the last proviso, though, making the afore voicings, and, its covering clause (a) of sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Act, (i) yet the first proviso underneath sub-section (2) (a) rather ousts the play, of the last proviso, (ii) as the vehicle concerned, was engaged, in carrying goods of dangerous or hazardous nature, and, when thereupon, the, clout of clause (a) of sub-section (2) of Section 14, is subsumed, the concomitant effect thereof, is that, the last proviso underneath sub-section (2) rather also loosing its vigour. However, the afore submission, is sparked, by a gross misunderstanding, of, the play of the first proviso, as, occurs hence underneath clause (a) of sub-section (2), of Section 14 of the Act, (iii) as, there exists no evidence, on record, in, tandem with evident statutory fact, as, borne therein, vis-a-vis, the offending vehicle being engaged in carrying goods of dangerous or hazardous nature, (iv) and, thereupon, the operation, and, clout of the last proviso, occurring underneath sub-section (2) of Section 14, rather remains intact, (v) and, when, dehors, the expiry, of, the driving licence, held by the driver, of the offending vehicle, hence, occurring on 21.5.2013, and, the ill-fated mishap, occurring on 26.5.2013, thereupon, with the ill-fated mishap, happening within a period of 30 days, rather since the expiry of Ex.PW2/A, concomitantly, hence, the apt last statutory proviso, borne in Section 14, becomes rejuvenated, (vi) and, dehors the non renewal, of, the apposite driving licence, by one Shaukat Ali, the phraseology borne therein, vis-a-vis, it yet remaining effective, for a period of 30 days, since its expiry occurring on 21.5.2013, covers, and, clothes, the driving licence, borne in Ex.RW2/A, hence with an aura of validity, (vii) and, thereupon, when the driving licence is not proven, to be fake, and, unauthentic, hence, the learned tribunal was enjoined, not to, bring into play the principle of pay and recovery, rather was enjoined to fasten, the apposite indemnificatory liability, upon, the insurer of the offending vehicle. 5. 5. Be that as it may, the afore interpretation meted, to the apt provisions of Section 14 of the Act, would also not beget any conflict, with the provisions borne in Section 15 of the Act, as Section 15 of the Act, omits to make any voicings, vis-a-vis, the longevity of period, of driving licences, issued, vis-a-vis, transport vehicles, (i) and, when sub-section (2) (a) of Section 14 of the Act, along with its last proviso, with explicity brings hence to the fore, the apt thereto rather, the afore statutory enunciation, and, appertains explicitly, and, specifically, vis-a-vis, a transport vehicle, (ii) reiteratedly hence, there is no disharmony inter se Section 14 of the Act, and, Section 15 of the Act, (iii) rather the specific statutory provisions appertaining, to, hence a transport vehicle, in category, whereof the driving licence of Shaukat Ali rather fell, does obviously, and unflinchingly constrain, a conclusion, qua there being hence a gross overlooking, by the learned tribunal concerned, vis-a-vis, the apt play, of, the provisions appertaining, to the statutory authorisation, or statutory protections' hence bestowed, upon, one Shaukat Ali, vis-a-vis, the longevity, of, the latter's driving licence. 6. For the foregoing reasons, all the afore appeals bearing FAO Nos. 368 of 2018, 369 of 2018, and 370 of 2018, instituted herebefore by the registered owner of the offending vehicle, are allowed, and, the award impugned, before this Court, is, modified in the afore manner. Consequently, the indemnificatory liability, vis-a-vis, the compensation amounts, as stood adjudged by the learned tribunal, vis-a-vis, the claimants concerned, is fastened, upon, the insurer of the offending vehicle. All pending applications also stand disposed of. Records be sent back forthwith.