GURMUKH SINGH Vs. AJMER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE controversy here is with regard to the value and status of a learner's licence in the context of the liability of the insurance company to indemnify the owner of a motor vehicle involved in an accident. The issue raised here being whether the holder of a learner's licence was not one "duly authorised" to drive it. In other words, does the insurance company stand absolved from liability if the driver of the offending motor vehicle held merely a learner's driving licence ?

(2.) THERE is a conflict of judicial opinion on this matter. A Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat in Chanchalben v. Shailesh Kumar Pandu-rao Thakore [1974] ACJ 393, held that the expression "the person driving holds a licence to drive the motor cycle" included also a person holding merely a learner's driving licence. A contrary view was taken by the High Court of Madras in Ambujam v. Hindustan Ideal Insurance Co. [1981] ACJ 175, where it was held that an effective driving licence could not be equated with a mere learner's licence which is granted to a person learning driving and which by itself could not vest him with a right independently to drive a motor vehicle on the strength of it.

(3.) THE matter relating to the liability of the insurance company in an accident caused by the rash and negligent driving of a person holding a learner's licence is of undoubted public importance, besides there being contrary views expressed with regard to it, as evidenced by the two authorities cited above. In this view of the matter, the papers of this case be placed before the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice for constituting a larger Bench to examine and adjudicate upon the issue raised. S. P. Goyal, J.