Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Chunni Lal Gupta and Others

Hon''ble Sanjay Misra, J.—Heard Sri Amaresh Sinha, learned counsel for the appellant.

According to Sri Amaresh Sinha, the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is patently illegal in view of the judgment of the Hon''ble Supreme Court passed in the case of ''Iswar Chandra & others Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. & others'', reported in 2007(2) TAC 393 (SC) inasmuch as the accident took place on 16.06.2009 whereas the license of the driver of the vehicle was valid w.e.f. 22.06.2006 to 21.02.2009 and it was renewed only on 19.06.2009 upto 18.06.2011. According to him when the driver of the vehicle did not have a valid driving license on the date of accident i.e. 16.06.2009 the Insurance Company could not be made liable to pay the compensation to the injured.

Having considered the submission of learned counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned judgment of the Tribunal, Issue No.2 has been decided with respect to validity of the effectiveness of the license of the driver. The Tribunal has found that the license of the driver expired on 21.02.2009, the accident occurred on 16.06.2009 and the license was renewed on 19.06.2009. It has been recorded that the renewal which has been made would relate back to the date of expiry in view of a Division Bench decision of this Court passed in the case of ''National Insurance Company Vs. Mahadev Rawat & others'', 2010(2) TAC 769 ALD.

While considering the aforesaid submission as also the findings recorded by the Tribunal and the law cited by learned counsel it will be seen that the Insurance Company can escape from its liability to pay the compensation in case the renewal application was not filed within 30 days of the expiry. From the record no such defence was taken by the appellant and even if the same was the subject matter of argument before the Tribunal no evidence was led to show that the application for renewal given by the driver of the vehicle was made beyond 30 days after expiry of the license. In the absence of any such evidence the findings recorded by the Tribunal with respect to the renewal of the license of the driver of the vehicle on 19.06.2009 relating back to the date of expiry cannot be vitiated.

In Iswar Chandra (Supra) the Supreme Court held as quoted hereunder:

Section 15(1) of the Act and the first proviso appended thereto reads as under:

Renewal of driving licenses.- (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.

From a bare perusal of the said provision, it would appear that the licence is renewed in terms of the said Act and the rules framed thereunder. The proviso appended to Section 15(1) of the Act in no uncertain terms states that whereas the original licence granted despite expiry remains valid for a period of 30 days from the date of expiry, if any application for renewal thereof is filed thereafter, the same would be renewed from the date of its renewal. The accident took place on 28th April, 1995. As on the said date, the renewal application had not been filed, the driver, did not have a valid licence on the date when the vehicle met with the accident.

In National Insurance Co. Vs. Mahadev Rawat (Supra) a Division Bench of this Court held as quoted hereunder:

Thus, a person whose licence is ordinarily renewed in terms of the Motor Vehicles Act and the rules framed thereunder despite the fact that during the interregnum period, namely, when the accident took place and the date of expiry of the licence, he did not have a valid licence, he could during the prescribed period apply for renewal thereof and could obtain the same automatically without undergoing any further test or without having been declared unqualified therefor. Proviso appended to Section 15 in unequivocal term states that the licence can be renewed within interim period which may be maximum five years as per proviso Section 15(4) of the Act from its expiry.

In the instant case, the licence was earlier renewed from 18th November, 1989 to 17th November, 1992 and again it was renewed from 27th May, 1995 to 17th November, 1998. Thus, the interregnum period is less than 5 years and fully covered by Proviso to Section 15(4) of the Act, as stated above. Moreover, during this period, it cannot be said that the driver has lost his skill or has forgotten expertise for driving the particular vehicle.

Clearly, the view taken by the Tribunal is in accordance with law.

There is no merit in the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant.

The appeal has no merit and it is accordingly dismissed.

The statutory amount deposited in this appeal be remitted to the Tribunal forthwith.

No order is passed as to costs.