New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Chikkappaiah @ Chikkappa on 21 July, 2008

[Cites 0, Cited by 5]

Karnataka High Court

New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Chikkappaiah @ Chikkappa on 21 July, 2008

Equivalent citations: AIR 2009 (NOC) 296 (KAR.) = 2008 (6) AIR KAR R 449, 2008 (6) AIR KANT HCR 449, 2009 A I H C 451, (2009) 1 KANT LJ 634, (2009) 2 ACC 593, (2009) 2 ACJ 1283, (2009) 2 TAC 231, (2009) 3 ACC 517, (2009) 2 CIVLJ 86

Bench: Anand Byrareddy

THU I-$1.1': 1- IIl"'II\lI.l"lIl'I.III"' IIITII ﬂ

vs: w-¢--- --. ._-.-.-. -.-

I1I\Jl'l \-\lU!Sl Ur !\l1llI'l"Ill'|I\I'| u IIVJII uyyunu vu uu--uuu--u.-uu1 . .-

'\"-:....m'="'£

.1.

II Till I-IIGII coma' or KARIIPAIA A'! ulaunnl
naman THIS was 21?' mar or JuLr zoos
sarong
THE HOI'BLB um, JUﬂTICE.AlAlD 2m#35D"m : 

M.F.A.uo.a4o OF 2o05{kv3T *'
sarcasm , u .

.....----- ---- ----u-

MEW IHBIA ASSUPJWZE CO LTD }.
REP EV ssuxca DIVISIOHAL MAmmsEn_
Iv FLDOR TOHER BLOCK " ="
uuzwv auxanzms,
BHNGALORE 21 , L»~:v _'-g, =
,_ ,n-_;.;.A£PEELAN!j°
my Sci R J;«.1PRAIr;2m.s1¢i~_ Arm?  ' * '  '

AND

1 CHIKKAERRIAH G ﬁa;xx3£aa"
SEO n3sAP£3=;g_ j' *.
mason 2 ' .'»*.A%_' V~_ -

Rio-vnNKgT$punA'po3T

aaznuxsnﬁmwntrahux

_ xaL22 n1sT1RcT'*

'     ..... 
EAJQR,

~ *3f0 ﬁEHJUﬂDAIAH SETTY

'-Lgxsaﬁzpuivns, NEHRU EXTN.

}'dJ°;E.V-f,'-~£ZI}3;= TURN
EﬁhAE.DISTRICT

" t';

'v 3 Tgununamw sunmnosum
* +. MAJGR
Efﬁ no 39 anxnwnv PARALLEL nuns,
K.P Ens?
HANQRLORE 20

4 MATIIDNRL IESURANCE CEZI LTD
REP BY DIVISIDNAL HMIRGER

EFKTHI CC33~!PLEK, IJALAERGH MISSION RDAEI
EL':I\IG§"LE:DRE - 27 ... RESPONDENTS

¢§By 1-1,r'E LAWYERS NET -' AIIV. FOR R1:

%

---.---n- 1': uur-'unusual-ll\l'| I'll\7l'! \-IJIJKI §------.-. ..---.u.-.-... -.--- ...--..- w----.... --. .---.-.. -..-....-.._-

-5.

'drivﬂng licancs', and would paint cu: ﬁhﬁt a driving licence meana, a licenae iaéﬁeﬂ by 5, aampatant authority autho:;5ingH"a"~§aison, to"

drive a apeciﬁic mmtar véhiﬁle'9f_a"aﬁéCific clasa an da5aripticn.*TW_ Sactiwn 3 ofK§ha ﬁd%d#§ﬁldtﬁﬁhﬁ#t9 that me peraan shall dﬁifg Q ﬁQ%%£?§§hicle unless he hﬁldﬁ §ﬂ~%§fea%i%§§ami§ing_@i%enca and that an p5rSdﬁﬂF%Eﬁﬁi:t§%iv§i Q vtransport vehicle wnle$#mV'#i% i§driﬁiﬁg' ii%anca specifically antif3eﬁ hiﬁi£§Rﬁ$Ds%§ Fxom aW:¢adiﬁg cf Sectimn V 5f the Act it :Aig pﬁﬁﬁtﬁé nut that no person shall be granted a iéafn§K{$' licence to drive a tzanaport *».rs§.}:Viz:vii:é'v1"1nla$s he has a driving licence to .u'ﬁ ﬂ:;vé Q light maﬁa: vehicle, for at least cue yézait .

Section 10§j3 of the Rat requires that a l&aznar'a limence or a driving licence shall be exyreaaed as entitling the hﬁldez to drive %

----- ------ -- -- ----- --~-- --«----u -----. ...v.. ..v...'. 5,. n,.'."',..|".'",' 1-'"'rI Luau' .5.

a mczfccar vehicle of the classes 5}g_:a¢':'._f'ied therein and one of the vehicl--i==,a""= ':;;'a*s._T "'t::ana;3c-.1:'t -vehicle" wh;i.]_.VgM _ thug v":3¢l3}c::"

inﬁludgs "light meter vehiGla"»:

Frqm a reading <>f"'L«L..V':S2::.«::ti.<:>r;. _14[ Ac:t it is painted c>ut~..V_the.~tiMa{ 41i"c:-ancze '1:"ca""c1x:iva an ""?;ranspc:rt vehit::le"'~l AV vxiﬁrilﬁi '.~.._1?.i+:'.aA« j~.éﬁfective for three §,'re:a.;23'2._:g§iha::::aa.3 '.ﬁ.'. "'3'-"'9-Q'-f.?L'§3§ at any other licezzuse 'for a peric:-<3 <>f 20 case the driving iice:nae""L4__:24}:tii*'a1_<£'1:.' indicate that it was iasﬁ/:es:i~ f:c:sf""~'rI#- v3?E.A1fic:-:1 ref 12 'years and clearly »' bx'-.'e._1V:'e 'Ai:i'i£aA:"'~--.§;r:cior$am9nt that the halder was "«;&:h¢:iaed§"£c drive a "11ggt unto: vehicle 51153 "'-Vtréiis rt "'. The cmmsel wauld submit "i:1*x§t "'in the judgment: of the Supreme Court 'A"-ﬁégdrtmd in Hatianal Insurance Company Limited V' vs -- mam RAI mm mmns, repcrted in 2006 RCJ 3.336. it is Clearly hald that the owner of 8 .. ..- -._ - . ----.¢ vuaupnnu urn £\l-|l\l'l"'lIJ"'|l\l'I I1I\,rI K-'JIJKC .7.

a licence of a threewwheeler, autericivzshaw adapted as 5. e:ielivery_---9é*ar1';5j'L"----._:'1*E1.e licence was net meant far <i3;ipvim":':"' «':1::rénsport""

vehicle' but for a gs-eci-5 ;'<:erry»ing_"' 1:ii1Eﬁ--.1,i?;_'- carrier and the ec:ure*:iv_'*1<'gaelci--'i'i:i91e,t was met liable since 'l;;J:4ie'..:_].i5j:en;:;3'e«--:_ei.e5[granted fer twenty yeare V and hence the drivingiicena'e":.£éeS" meant fer a iiiévemiael awake to =."i}::a§-3 to held that the Act AVVréVr.:,_e:i're'"ei'p._ereon driving a. transport ve21i».eZ2ge'V-i:_"t»:>V ﬁﬁiﬁ' licence to the saiigi 2effe='::t._Vv auishoziaing him to cirive a ".':.:;:vi.ue:a*..«s§¥;:-V.?-:..s3:.1::'A.'«--..vehicle, specifically, and in the it cannot be held that the liable ta satisfy the claim.

"5__§3~ Per contra, the learned ceunsel for Ireapszz:-ndenta would point out that the case __.§.s czlearly rzoeered by the judgment of the Suzarerae Court in the cage of NATIONAL II*ISTJE.=!~.NCE COMPEPTY LIMITED "" 'IS " BNPIPAPPE 5

---v- --v---- urn nurnun-Iran'-Iliri III\7lI \u\JIJﬂI .11..

pzzasant case, notwithstanding the endea;v§1z;§~.._on the part cf the mammal for the "'.:_.r;T,~' paint mat E:-can the pzzavisigna r3f."th;a _'3§dt ':hav4c"' the aiwziver was net quailifi-$1 't;_c:"~"*?i:_;a txmtap-art vehicle "5-éitian hisV 1_i'<A2jga'zaa.':9 is,"

specifically n<:.at_ and-_:_.§£s..adV._»_ féir'-._ ;irjV.5ving as tzanapert vehicle j _ 7

3. an iﬁhaée ﬁbnt§Qti§§§; though the aswunarael lﬁainted out from tha Tf".'r'f. 'thé'._"fi'ié;»vi3ians rafarred to unless the lie-mm-a 5111-'?i_'.c+'?"3<"is}és"~s:= V5,":-d;=:i'ir'é:: ti: drive a tranﬁxiozzt <;*:e'.¥ £ia:_1.;a,VvV.A.he wt3'uii:i rmt: be entitled to do so, ta the judgment of the Supreme ¢qﬁrt_ i§= the case sf NATIONAL INSURANCE COHPEV LTD "" VS '* 1'-'sR'.NAPPA IRAPPA NESRRIA AND "7 c¢ﬁ3Rs rayorted in 2003 AIR saw 905 which has éaven been referred to in the later judgment La. E532}-11i5:.2:~mEI~I RAHEHANSHA FAKIP. AND ANOTI-IER, the Supxrmrze court baa not taken a different View insofar as the question as to whether: a <55

- -- --- u a us." 2 Inven-

IIu1um vr-nu:-um ' - ..

QVUM TI I'H'II'\I"'I'l'II'I'I IIIYII TYYIII vp .12.

parser: holding a light ma-tor V$hiQl_€?~~,_:13z§Vi_ng eniabiszd ta drive a transport vehiclri since: the dafinitizm szsf 'liight m£$fé¢::'_'*I§éihic,laf4"' wauid indicate that it taikaést ismhrasgwa bath a. trax1s;€_t5;"rf: v-ahic3.e'i_no1:.--.Vi' traxispcrt '2.-*2-hic'_*J.__»a. _f.VI:'f<3rc:afu1 arguments of the'"c;i1.z1é}_g'};:_':é€$'rVfi%ha_appellant to ﬁrzeim: mat 'Jthe licence GﬁIE§'iﬂg_ to drive a have to be viewxiégi zrf the judgment of the S%1prer$0;a"--iE:uz;'3:£ pirovide the benefit tqfpﬁ&~rE$ﬁmn$ént§.

::'3'«,&V:if{&.:ﬁ¢f;dingly, the appeal is dismissed. *I'1*.;éi in ciapcasit be remitted to the Tribmfﬁéal for the benefit of the respondents. Sd/-' Judge

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court