High CourtsSingle Bench

New India Assurance Company Limited vs Chanchala Devi And Others

Jammu And Kashmir High Court · Decided on 13 July 2020 · Citation: (2020) 07 J&K CK 0073

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjeev Kumar, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Appeal No. 288 Of 2009, IA No. 409 Of 2009
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 419 words

Sanjeev Kumar, J

1.

The New India Assurance Company Limited is in appeal against the judgment and award dated 06.01.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kathua (hereinafter 'the Tribunal' for short) in case file No.82/claim entitled Mst. Chanchala Devi and others v. Waryam Dass and others, whereby compensation of ₹ 1,53,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% is awarded to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 (hereinafter 'the claimants').

2.

The award impugned has been assailed primarily on the ground that despite the fact that the insurer had sufficiently proved before the Tribunal that the driver of the offending vehicle (passenger bus) was not holding a valid and effective driving license, as such, insurer was not liable to indemnify the insured and pay compensation to the claimants.

3.

Mr. R.K.Gupta, learned senior counsel, appearing for the insurer, submits that the offending vehicle involved in the accident was a heavy passenger vehicle, whereas the driver, who was driving the vehicle at the time of accident was possessing license authorizing him to drive heavy goods vehicle and in the absence of PSV endorsement on his license, he was not authorized to drive a passenger vehicle. The award, however, has not been challenged on any other ground including quantum.

4.

Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record, I am of the view that the issue raised by the learned senior counsel is no longer res integra. It is now trite law that if a person is holding a license authorizing him to drive heavy goods vehicle, he is competent to drive heavy passenger vehicle too and absence of specific endorsement on the license is not a ground to absolve the Insurance Company of its liability to indemnify the insured.

5.

Admittedly, the driver of the offending vehicle was holding a valid driving license authorizing him to drive heavy goods vehicle and, therefore, in view of the settled legal position, he was competent enough to drive heavy passenger vehicle i.e. bus in the instant case. Absence of PSV endorsement on his license will not, in any manner, affect the expertise and competence of the driver to drive the similar type of vehicle, though designed for carrying passengers instead of goods. Reference in this regard is invited to the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Kulwant Singh & others Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., (2015) 2 SCC 186.

6.

In view of the aforesaid, this appeal is found to be without any merit, hence the same is dismissed.