IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 2819 of 2009()
1. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.
... Petitioner
Vs
1. K.RAGHAVAN, S/O.KUNHIRAMAN, THACHOLI
... Respondent
2. T.K.RAVEENDRAN, S/O.KUNHIRAMAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :12/08/2010
O R D E R
M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A.No.2819 OF 2009
---------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of August, 2010.
JUDGMENT
This is an appeal preferred against award of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Vatakara in O.P (MV) No.147 of 2007.
The claimant, who sustained injuries in a road accident, has been
awarded a compensation of Rs.30,800/- with 7.5% interest and
Insurance Company has been directed to pay the amount. The
Insurance Company has come up in appeal challenging the award
of the Claims Tribunal in not even granting a right to recover for
in the absence of valid licence. The award of the learned
Tribunal makes it very clear that the driver of the lorry did not
have badge or rather did have an authorisation to drive a
transport vehicle. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has considered
this question and also by virtue of the amendment to Section 10
of the Motor Vehicles Act, the word ‘transport vehicle’ has been
incorporated and under Section 3, it is mandatory that the
person should have the driving licence to drive the vehicle
which he is driving. Or, in other words, in order to drive a
transport vehicle, there must be a licence with badge. It is this
badge which authorise the driver to drive the transport vehicle.
M.A.C.A.No.2819 OF 2009 2
So, admittedly , when it is a lorry and it is found that the driver
has no badge which is authorising to drive the transport vehicle,
it has to be held that there was no valid driving licence, which
amounts to breach of policy conditions. Therefore, Tribunal
should have at least granted an order of recovery. Therefore, the
award of the Tribunal is modified and it is made clear that on
satisfaction of the award to the claimant, the Insurance Company
is entitled to proceed against the owner for the realisation of the
amount paid by it in satisfaction of the award by executing a very
same award. To this extent, this appeal is allowed and disposed of
accordingly.
M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE.
mns