The United India Insurnace ... vs Smt. Yadamma And 2 Others

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3479 Tel
Judgement Date : 15 November, 2021

Telangana High Court
The United India Insurnace ... vs Smt. Yadamma And 2 Others on 15 November, 2021
Bench: P.Madhavi Devi
     THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI

      CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO.877 OF 2007

JUDGMENT:

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by Opposite Party No.2-Insurance Company challenging the Award of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour-I, Hyderabad, in W.C. No.156 of 2006, dated 11.09.2007.

2. The said WC was filed by the parents of the deceased- T. Parvathalu against the employer and owner of the van bearing No.AP11U-3403 and the insurer of the van i.e., the United India Insurance Company Limited.

3. Heard Sri A. Ramakrishna Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company. Perused the material available on record.

4. In this appeal, though the learned counsel for the insurance company has raised number of grounds as substantial questions of law, his main contention is that the deceased-driver was holding a light motor vehicle licence non-transport, whereas at the time of accident he is driving the transport goods vehicle and therefore, the applicants are not entitled to claim any compensation. 2

5. It is seen that the issue is covered by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Mukund Dewangan Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Limited1, wherein it is held that where a person holding a licence for driving a particular type of vehicle, drives the transport vehicle of similar category of vehicles, it cannot be said that he has violated the conditions of insurance policy. Thus, he cannot be denied the compensation on account of injuries sustained by him during the course of his employment. In this case, the driver was holding a licence to drive non-transport LMV, while he was driving a transport LMV and died in the course of his employment with opposite party No.2 and therefore, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the award of the learned Commissioner.

6. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.

7. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this CMA shall also stand dismissed.

___________________________ JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI Date: 15.11.2021 Isn 1 (2017) 14) SCC 663