THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 1676 of 2011 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed against the order dated 08.04.2004 in O.P.No.876 of 1998 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal- cum-I Additional District Judge, Khammam, by the claimant. According to the claimant on 10.03.1998 at about 11.30 AM while he was returning to Thummalagadda at Khammam near Andhra Furniture Shop a scooter bearing No.AP-20-E-472 driven by the 1st respondent in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the petitioner, as a result of which, the claimant received multiple injuries and spent money for treatment and made a claim for compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. The insurance company contended that the petitioner is put to strict proof of the rashness and negligence of the driver of the scooter and also further contended that the driver of the scooter was not having a valid driving license and accordingly, there is no liability as such for the insurance company. The lower Tribunal on consideration of the rival contentions, has granted a compensation of Rs.78,000/- recoverable from the 1st respondent, who is the owner of the vehicle. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the reasoning of the lower Tribunal exonerating the liability of the insurance company is not proper. As can be seen from the award of the lower Tribunal, the evidence of R.W.1 shows that the 1st respondent was not having a valid driving license at the time of incident and marked Ex.B-1 license of the respondent and he was only having a license to drive a light motor vehicle and not a two wheeler. Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, the lower Tribunal accepted the contention of the appellant and exonerated the liability. It is not a case where the driver of the motorcycle, the 1st respondent, was not having any license. It is a case that the 1st respondent was having a license to drive a light motor vehicle but not a two wheeler. It has been now fairly well settled that the claim against the third parties cannot be dismissed on that ground and in the case of National India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh and others[1], wherein it was held that if a person driving the vehicle has got a license to drive a particular vehicle and he drives a different vehicle, for which separate license is required, the insurance company cannot avoid the liability and is liable to pay the compensation. Therefore, in view of the circumstances and the settled principles of law, the exoneration of the insurance company is not correct and the insurance company is liable to pay the compensation. However, the lower Tribunal has granted interest at 9% per annum and in view of the settled principles of law, it shall be reduced to 7.5% per annum. With the above modification, the appeal is allowed. No costs. ________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J 08-08-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No. 1676 of 2011 DATE: 08-08-2011 MR [1] 2004 SCCL.COM 22