United India Insurance Company Ltd vs Bhikhubhai Amarsinhbhai Parmar & on 8 May, 2014
17. The Delhi High Court in Future General India
Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mohd. Ibrahim (supra) has referred
to the relevant provisions of the Act and the rules in extenso
and has held that a conjoint reading of sections 10, 11 and 14
of the Act will show that a person driving a vehicle must
possess a licence to drive that class of vehicle which he
intends to drive. If he proposes to drive any vehicle other than
one for which he/she possesses an effective driving licence, he
has to seek an addition to his/her driving licence. In other
words, if a person wants to drive only a motor car whose
unladen weight does not exceed 7500 kgs., he needs to have a
licence to drive a light motor vehicle only. At the same time, if
a person wants to drive a motor car for hire or reward, then
that light motor vehicle will become a public service vehicle as
well and a holder would not be competent to drive the motor
car for hire and reward, that is, a maxicab or a motorcab or a
taxi unless he possesses a licence to drive a transport vehicle
for light motor vehicle. Similarly, every goods carriage is
included in the definition of transport vehicle. Thus, the holder
of a licence must possess a licence to drive a transport vehicle
of the category of the goods vehicle whose gross vehicle
weight does not exceed 7500 kgs., then he must possess a
licence to drive a light motor vehicle of the category of
transport vehicle. If he wants to drive a goods vehicle whose
Page 23 of 30
C/FA/3289/2013 JUDGMENT
gross vehicle weight is above 7500 kgs. or 12,000 kgs., then
he must possess a licence to drive a medium motor vehicle of
the category of transport vehicle and heavy motor vehicle of
the category of transport vehicle, respectively. In the facts of
the said case, since the respondent-driver possessed a licence
to drive a light motor vehicle (non-transport), the court held
that he was not competent to drive the delivery van. The court
observed that it was not the case of the respondents therein
that the accident was caused on account of some mechanical
failure or any other similar cause, having no nexus with the
driver not possessing requisite type of licence. Thus, the
insurer is entitled to avoid the liability.