Light Motor Vehicle License Holder Permitted To Drive Tractor: Karnataka HC Enhances Motor Accident Compensation
The Karnataka High Court awarded enhanced compensation to claimants in a motor accident case while observing that a driver holding a driving licence for a light motor vehicle is permitted to a tractor.
The Court reiterated the Supreme Court’s decision in Mukund Dewangan v. Oriental Insurance Company Limited (2017) wherein the Court held that the person who holds a light motor vehicle driving licence is permitted to drive a vehicle which is unladen weight not exceeding 7500kg would be light motor vehicle like a tractor.
A Single Bench of Justice K. Natarajan observed, “In view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the case of the claimants is that tractor and trailer was less than 7500kg unladen weight…Such being the case the driver of the vehicle is having valid and effective driving licence to drive the said vehicle in view of the judgment in the case of Mukund Dewangan (supra). Therefore, the contention of the Insurance Company cannot be acceptable that the driver was not having valid and effective driving licence is not acceptable.”
Advocate S.S. Mamadapur appeared for the appellants, while Advocate Sudarshan M. represented the respondents.
The appeal was filed under Section 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act) to set aside the judgment and award by the trial court and MACT.
The incident allegedly occurred when the deceased, riding a motorcycle, were struck by the tractor-trailer, which was allegedly being driven at high speed. The impact was severe, leading to the immediate deaths of both victims on the spot.
The claimants argued that the tractor caused the accident and that the driver held a license for a light motor vehicle, which is permissible for driving a vehicle with an unladen weight of 7,500 kg. Therefore, they asserted that the driver was authorized to operate the tractor.
The Insurance Company on the other hand contended that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid and effective driving licence. Therefore, they argued that fastening the liability on the insurance company was not correct.
The High Court had to determine whether the Tribunal was justified in holding the insurance company liable, considering that the trailer was not insured with them and that the driver allegedly lacked a valid and effective driving license.
The Bench, in light of Mukund Dewangan (supra), held that the driver of the vehicle had a valid and effective driving licence to drive the said vehicle.
Consequently, the Court stated, “Therefore, the contention of the Insurance Company cannot be acceptable that the driver was not having valid and effective driving licence is not acceptable.”
Accordingly, the High Court partly allowed the appeal.
Cause Title: Sri. Chidanandayya & Anr. v. Shivalingappa Mallappa Biradar & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:KHC-K:6007)
