Court No. - 24
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1217 of 2003 Appellant :- United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Respondent :- Deepak Kumar @ Pintu & Another Counsel for Appellant :- S.K. Mehrotra Counsel for Respondent :- Ram Singh,Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri S.K. Mehrotra, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan, learned counsel for the respondents.
The present appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company challenging the judgement and award dated 15.02.2003 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Allahabad, whereby the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 97,000/- along with 8% interest as compensation to the claimants/respondent.
The Tribunal on the issue of driving licence held that it is not relevant as to whether the Tempo was driven by Shakeel Ahmad or Karim Ullah. The said finding was recorded by the Tribunal as the driving licence of Shakeel Ahmad and Karim Ullah were filed on record and the Insurance Company did not dispute the correctness of the driving licence.
The counsel for the Insurance Company contended that neither Shakeel Ahmad nor Karim Ullah were authorized to drive the Tempo as Tempo being transport vehicle as their driving licence did not contain endorsement by licensing authority to drive transport vehicle.
The Tribunal after appreciating the evidence on record held that the Tempo is a light motor vehicle, and driving licence of the driver authorized him to drive light motor vehicle, hence, the Tempo was driven by a driver holding a valid driving licence. The controversy is now settled by the Apex Court in the case of Mukund Dewangan Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Limited (2017) 14 Supreme Court Cases 663, wherein the Apex Court has held that a transport vehicle, the gross laden weight of which does not exceed 7500/- would be a transport vehicle and holder of a driving licence to drive class of light motor vehicle as provided in Section 10 (2) (d) of Motor Vehicle Act 1988 is competent to drive transport vehicle, the gross vehicle weight of which does not exceed 7500 k.g. Thus, the submission of counsel for appellant on the issue of driving licence is misconceived.
The claimant/respondents has also preferred cross objection in the instant appeal.
The Tribunal has awarded Rs.97,000/- as compensation on the basis of evidence on record after considering the income of the deceased/claimant. The claimant did not file any disability certificate nor led any evidence to prove disability suffered by him.
Thus, in the facts of the present case, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper.
Thus, for the reasons given above, the appeal of Insurance Company and cross objection of claimant lacks merit and are hereby dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 13.9.2018/Israr