IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1250 of 2007()
1. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. MADHAVA, S/O. KRISHNA,
... Respondent
2. MUNEER, S/O. ABDULLA BEARY,
3. ASHISH, S/O. SHIVARAMA,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
For Respondent :SRI.SATHEESH R.NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :21/08/2008
O R D E R
M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------
M.A.C.A. No. 1250 OF 2007
---------------------
Dated this the 21st day of August, 2008
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Kasaragod, in OP(MV) 53/03. The claimant
sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal awarded him a
compensation of Rs.22,900/- with 9% interest. The Insurance Company
was directed to pay the amount. Aggrieved by that decision, the Insurance
Company has come up in appeal.
2. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company contended that
the vehicle involved in the accident was an autorickshaw, which is a
transport vehicle and that there was no authorisation to drive a transport
vehicle that is in the form of a valid badge and therefore, the Insurance
Company is entitled to get the right to reimbursement. Suppose a person is
driving the vehicle without a proper licence, the owner may be bound to
reimburse the amount. Admittedly the vehicle involved is an autorickshaw
which is used as a vehicle to carry passengers. This question precisely
came up for consideration before the Apex court in the decision reported in
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Roshanben Rahemansha Fakir and
Another [2008 (3) T.A.C. 20 (SC)]. It was held in that case after
considering Sec.147, 3 and 10 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules and
MACA No. 1250/07 2
Rule 51 that when a person is to drive a commercial vehicle he must hold
an effective licence for the same in terms of Sec.10 of the Act. Definition of
light motor vehicle would not include a light transport vehicle and therefore
it was held in that case that being a light transport vehicle there is no
proper authorisation to drive the light transport vehicle. It has to be held
that the driver was riding the vehicle without proper licence. The Apex
court also considered the various provisions and forms and held that in
such cases there is no effective driving licence as contemplated under the
Act. Therefore it has to be held that the vehicle is driven without a valid
authorisation to drive transport vehicle and therefore there is a breach of
policy conditions. But the claimant being a third party, is entitled to claim
the amount from the Insurance Company but the owner of the vehicle is
bound to reimburse the amount to the Insurance Company. In this case,
the 2nd respondent is impleaded as the owner of the vehicle. Therefore, he
is bound to reimburse the amount.
The award passed by the Tribunal is modified and the Insurance
Company is given a right of recovery of the amount from the 2nd respondent
after satisfying the award in favour of the claimant.
M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE
vps
MACA No. 1250/07 3