 to recover the same from the owner (appellant).){kind=link}
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has allowed the appeal of a driver against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kathua dated 29.04.2017 whereby the Tribunal while awarding compensation to the claimants, granted liberty to the insurance company (respondent 1) to recover the same from the owner (appellant).
The appeal has been filed on the ground that the Tribunal has wrongly granted the liberty to Insurance Company to recover the award amount from the appellant as the driver of the vehicle was not holding a valid driving license having Public Service Vehicle (PSV) endorsement.
Sandeep Gupta, the counsel for the appellant, stated that the PSV endorsement for driving a transport vehicle is not necessary as per law laid down by the Apex Court in Mukund Dewangan v Oriental Insurance Company Limited, (2017)14 SCC 663.
Baldev Singh, counsel appearing for the insurance company, has not denied the proposition of law in the judgment.
A single-judge bench of Justice Rajnesh Oswal observed, “In the judgment of Mukund Dewangan’s case (supra), it has been categorically held that “there is no requirement to obtain a separate endorsement to drive a transport vehicle, and if a driver is holding a license to drive a light motor vehicle, he can drive transport vehicle of such class without any endorsement to that effect.” Respondent No. 1’s witness, namely, Jatinder Kumar in his testimony has deposed that on the basis of driving license issued to the driver, he cannot drive the matador for which PSV endorsement is necessary. The license is not PSV. In view of non-endorsement of PSV in the license only, the learned Tribunal has granted liberty to the Insurance Company to recover the award from the owner/appellant.”
Therefore, in view of the discussion and the law laid down in Mukund Dewangan’s case (supra), the Court held that liberty granted to the Insurance Company to recover the award amount from the appellant is not sustainable. “The award is modified to the extent that the liberty granted to the respondent No. 1-Insurance Company to recover the amount from the appellant is set aside”, order the Judge while modifying the Award.