This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed by the insurance company questioning the correctness of award dated 17.05.2014 passed by 3rd Addl. Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chhindwara whereby Rs.2,24,200/- has been awarded as compensation to claimant/respondent no.1 Premchand.

2. The only point for consideration in the present appeal is whether the driver holding a licence to drive "light motor vehicle", if driving a transport vehicle, is required to obtain endorsement to drive a "transport vehicle".

3. This question is no more res-integra and has been answered by the Supreme Court in Mukund Dewangan 2 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.A. No.1906/2014 (The New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Premchand and others) vs. Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd . reported in 2017 (4) T.A.C.11 (S.C.) wherein, in para 46, it has been held, thus :-

Such transport vehicles are not excluded from the definition 3 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.A. No.1906/2014 (The New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Premchand and others) of the light motor vehicle by virtue of Amendment Act No.54/1994.

(ii) A transport vehicle and omnibus, the gross vehicle weight of either of which does not exceed 7500 kg. would be a light motor vehicle and also motor car or tractor or a road roller, 'unladen weight' of which does not exceed 7500 kg. and holder of a driving licence to drive class of "light motor vehicle" as provided in section 10(2)(d) is competent to drive a transport vehicle or omnibus, the gross vehicle weight of which does not exceed 7500 kg. or a motor car or tractor or road-roller, the "unladen weight" of which does not exceed 7500 kg. That is to say, no separate endorsement on the licence is required to drive a transport vehicle of light motor vehicle class as enumerated above. A licence issued under section 10(2)(d) continues to be valid after Amendment Act 54/1994 and 28th March,2001 in the form.

(iii) The effect of the amendment made by virtue of Act No.54/1994 w.e.f. 14th November.1994 while substituting clauses (e) to (h) of section 10(2) which contained "medium goods vehicle" in section 10(2)(e) , medium passenger motor vehicle in section 10(2)(f) , heavy goods vehicle in section 10(2)(g) and "heavy passenger motor vehicle" in section 10(2)(h) with expression 'transport vehicle' as substituted in section 10(2)(e) related only to the aforesaid substituted classes only. It does not exclude transport vehicle, from the purview of section 10(2)(d) and section 2(41) of the Act i.e. light motor vehicle.

(iv) The effect of amendment of Form 4 by insertion of "transport vehicle" is related only to the categories which were substituted in the year 1994 and the procedure to obtain driving licence for transport vehicle of class of "light motor vehicle" continues to be the same as it was and has not been changed and there is no requirement to obtain separate endorsement to drive transport vehicle, and if a driver is holding licence to drive light motor vehicle, he can drive transport vehicle of such class without any endorsement to that effect."

4. In the present case, claimant Premchand filed the claim petition claiming Rs.7,00,000/-as compensation on account of injuries suffered by him alleging that on 04.03.2005 at about 10 PM, while he was returning from Pachmarhi in Jeep No.MP-28A/1482, due to rash and 4 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.A. No.1906/2014 (The New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Premchand and others) negligent driving of driver of Commander Jeep No.MP28- A/1484, an accident took place in which claimant suffered 40% permanent disability.

5. The driver Rajesh remained ex-parte before the Tribunal and did not file any reply.

6. The owner Teja Uike filed the reply interalia contending that the said vehicle was insured with the appellant/insurance company, and, liability, if any, was of Insurance Company.

7. The appellant/insurance company took the defence that the offending vehicle was a transport/commercial vehicle and the driver was not holding the valid licence to drive the same. It was contended that at the time of accident, the owner of the vehicle was also not having the route permit.

8. The Claims Tribunal, after considering the evidence on record, awarded a sum of Rs.2,24,000/- as compensation to the claimant.

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.A. No.1906/2014 (The New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Premchand and others)

9. The contention of Shri Dinesh Koshal, learned counsel for the appellant is that the offending vehicle was a commercial transport vehicle and insured under the commercial vehicle policy (Ex.D/1) from 31.10.2004 to 30.10.2005. The driver was having licence only to drive "light motor vehicle", and not a "commercial vehicle".

10. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the claimant/respondent no.1 has submitted that the offending vehicle is a commercial transport vehicle, having seating capacity of 9 persons, the unladen weight of which does not exceed 7,500 kilograms, and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

11. It is evident from DL History (Ex.D/2) issued by the Licencing Authority, Chhindwara that the driver was holding licence to drive "light motor vehicle" on the date of accident. Section 2(21) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 defines "light motor vehicle" as "a transport vehicle or omnibus the gross vehicle wieght of either of which does not exceed 7,500 kilograms".

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.A. No.1906/2014 (The New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Premchand and others)

12. In view of aforesaid, the offending vehicle would be covered under the definition of "light motor vehicle", and, therefore, for that purpose no separate endorsement on the licence is required to drive such a transport vehicle.

13. Relying on the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Mukund Dewangan vs. Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd . (supra),and the aforestated facts, I do not find any merit in the present appeal.

14. The limited question is, accordingly, decided against the appellant/insurance company.

15. Resultantly, the appeal filed by the appellant/insurer being meritless is accordingly dismissed.

(Nandita Dubey) JUDGE jitin Digitally signed by JITIN KUMAR CHOURASIA Date: 2020.02.27 10:30:15 +05'30'