IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH FAO No. 1411 of 2010 Date of decision September 6, 2010 Surinder Kumar ....... Appellant Versus Chand Parkash and others ........ Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- Mr. Sandeep Jasuja, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Banni Thomas, Advocate for respondent No.2-Insurance Company. **** K. Kannan, J (oral). 1. The appeal is by the owner of the vehicle on whom the liability was fastened by the Tribunal on the ground that the driver had merely a Light Motor Vehicle License and the license did not bear a transport vehicle endorsement. The vehicle was admittedly a transport vehicle and the requirement under law under Section 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was clearly violated. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants refers to a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ashok Gangadhar Maratha Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. (1999) 6 SCC 620 that dealt with a case of a driver who had a driving license for a Light Motor Vehicle and it was pointed out that there was no valid permit for a goods carrier. The Hon'ble Supreme Court was dealing with a case of non-transport vehicle and the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that there was no statutory requirement to have a specific authorization on license. In this case, the fact is that it was a transport vehicle and no specific endorsement under Section 3 was made. The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to above has a bearing only for a person who was driving a non-transport vehicle. If it was a transport vehicle, the liability of the insurer cannot extend to any one beyond the claim and the right of recovery against the owner is always available. 3. It is sought to be contended that the accident did not arise out of the fact that he did not have a valid driving license and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has provided in the judgment of National Insurance Co v Swaran Singh (2004) 3 SCC 297 that if there was no fundamental breach in violation of the terms the insurer shall be bound to provide indemnity to the insured. The Hon'ble Supreme Court was referring to instances where the accident could have resulted due to mechanical fault or act of God which would have no reference to whether the driver had a valid license or not. The fundamental breach takes place,if a statutory violation is made. The driver of a transport vehicle cannot drive without a transport vehicle endorsement. Even Form IV of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules prescribes in the application for license, a specific clause for transport vehicle. Form VI of the same Rules also provide for a specific reference to a transport vehicle endorsement. If the driver was driving a transport vehicle, there had a occasioned a fundamental breach of the policy and the Tribunal was justified in fastening the liability on the owner. The appeal is without merit and is dismissed accordingly. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE September 6, 2010 archana