LexM/S CHATHA SERVICE STATION versus LALMATI DEVI & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 5 S.C.R. 435 : 2025 INSC 468 M/s Chatha Service Station v. Lalmati Devi & Ors. (Civil Appeal No(s). 5089-5092 of 2025) 08 April 2025 [Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran,* JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the Tribunal was justified in directing the insurer to pay the award amount and recover it from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle carrying hazardous goods, in view of the absence of an endorsement in the driving licence of the driver as required under s.11 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 r/w r.9 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. Headnotes† Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – ss.11, 14, 41 – Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 – r.9 – Motor accident involving an oil tanker killing a bicyclist and a pedestrian – Tribunal directed the insurer to pay the award and recover it from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle, since the driver did not have a valid licence to drive a vehicle carrying dangerous and hazardous goods in view of lack of endorsement on his licence as required u/s.11 r/w r.9 – High Court affirmed the order to pay and recover – Correctness: Held: r.9 deals with the professional skill of driving a specially designed vehicle carrying dangerous or hazardous goods – The accident was caused due to “rash and negligent driving of the vehicle” which the driver was not entitled to drive because of lack of endorsement on his licence as required u/s.11 r/w r.9 – The breach of non-compliance of the statutory requirement to undergo a training course to upskill the driving efficiency and product safety cannot be brushed aside as a technical breach not contributing to the accident – Admittedly, the driver did not have a licence having an endorsement as required under the Act and the Rules to drive a vehicle carrying dangerous and hazardous goods – The offending vehicle; the oil tanker, was a vehicle intended to carry goods of * Author 436 [2025] 5 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports dangerous and hazardous nature – Further, the training certificate was produced at the appellate stage for the first time without any explanation for its non-production before the Tribunal, raising genuine suspicion on veracity of certificate and was rightly found not acceptable as per Or. 41 R. 27, CPC – Appeals dismissed, direction to the insurance company to pay and recover, affirmed. [Paras 11, 10, 16-19] Interpretation of Statutes – Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – ss.2, 10, 11 – Additions to driving licence – Words ‘class’ or ‘description’ in s.11, used disjunctively not alternatively: Held: s.10 enumerates the various classes of vehicles for which license is granted and goods vehicle, simpliciter and those designed to carry dangerous and hazardous goods, fall within the class of ‘transport vehicle’ – Further, clause (j) of s.10(2) specifically speaks of ‘motor vehicle of a specified description’ – s.11 in relation to additions to driving licence, speaks of an existing driving licence to which any other class or description of motor vehicles can be added entitling the holder to thus drive a motor vehicle of more than one class or description – By the use of the words ‘class’ or ‘description’ independently, it is clear that the statute has used it disjunctively and not alternatively – This interpretation is in tune with the statutory scheme, which defines u/s.2 of the definition clause, vehicles of varying description like goods vehicle, heavy passenger vehicle medium goods vehicle and so on and so forth. [Para 13] Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – ss.3, 149 – ‘Effective license’ and ‘duly licensed’ – Distinction and various contingencies in which the insurer are absolved from their liability to indemnify, as discussed in Swaran Singh’s case, enumerated. [Para 15] Case Law Cited National Insurance Co. Ltd vs. Swaran Singh [2004] 1 SCR 180 : (2004) 3 SCC 297 – referred to. National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. K. Ramasamy, 2006 SCC OnLine Mad 963; United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. A. Verlaxmi, 2013 SCC OnLine Chh 272; National Insurance Company v. Harbans Kaur, FAO Nos. 1210 & 8292 of 2004 decided on 26.03.2018 – referred to. [2025] 5 S.C.R. 437 M/s Chatha Service Station v. Lalmati Devi & Ors. List of Acts Motor Vehicles Act, 1988; Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989; Civil Procedure Code, 1908. List of Keywords Motor accident; Oil tanker; Lack of endorsement on driving licence; Vehicle carrying dangerous and hazardous goods; Pay and recover; Insurance company to pay
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.