RAJPAL AND ANOTHER Vs. BIRAM WATI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The driver and the owner have filed the present appeal, assailing the impugned Award dated 18.3.2011, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, vide which the claim petition was allowed and the appellants were held liable to pay the compensation amount to the claimants.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the driver-appellant No.1 was holding a valid driving licence at the time of accident. He possessed a LMV driving licence i.e. for driving the Car, Jeep and Tractor. He has further contended that the offending vehicle i.e. TATA Ace, falls in the category of Light Motor Vehicle and the vehicle was fully insured with the Insurance Company. However, the liability has wrongly been fastened upon the appellants. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance upon the judgments delivered in The New India Assurance Company Ltd. vs. Mahender Singh and others, 2010 1 RCR(Civ) 934 and Oriental Insurance Company vs. Mukesh, 2011 2 RCR(Civ) 508.

(3.) On the other hand, the learned counsel for respondent No.2 has contended that the driver of the offending vehicle was holding a valid driving licence for LMV i.e. for Car, Jeep and Tractor and not for driving goods carrying vehicle. The offending vehicle i.e. TATA Ace is a good carrying vehicle. She has placed reliance upon the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Angad Kol and others, 2009 2 RCR(Civ) 419.