ARUN MISHRA,J. - (1.) In the reference, the main question involved is whether a driver who is having a licence to drive 'light motor vehicle' and is driving 'transport vehicle' of that class is required additionally to obtain an endorsement to drive a transport vehicle There is a conflict in the plethora of decisions of this Court. In Ashok Gangadhar Maratha v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (1999) 6 SCC 620, S. Iyyapan Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr. (2013) 7 SCC 62, Nagashetty Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. (2001) 8 SCC 56, the view taken by this Court was that when a driver is holding a licence to drive 'light motor vehicle', he is competent to drive a 'transport vehicle' of that category without specific endorsement to drive the transport vehicle; whereas in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Prabhu Lal (2008) 1 SCC 696, a view had been taken that before 2001 also, it was necessary for a driver possessing driving licence to drive light motor vehicle to obtain an endorsement to drive transport vehicle of that class; whereas in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Annappa Irappa Nesaria alias Nesargi & Ors. (2008) 3 SCC 464, a distinction was made in the legal position which existed before 28.3.2001 i.e. the date of amendment of the form and subsequent thereto. It was opined that before 28.3.2001 there was no necessity for the holder of a licence to drive light motor vehicle to obtain an endorsement to drive transport vehicle of that class. He could drive transport vehicle of Light Motor Vehicle category on the basis of holding a licence to drive light motor vehicle. In New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Roshanben Rahemansha Fakir & Anr. (2008) 8 SCC 253 and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Angad Kol & Ors. (2009) 11 SCC 356, the view had been taken that a driver holding licence to drive light motor vehicle in order to drive 'transport vehicle' of that class has to obtain a specific endorsement on licence authorizing him to drive a transport vehicle.
(2.) Following questions have been referred for decision to the larger Bench : 1. What is the meaning to be given to the definition of "light motor vehicle" as defined in Sec. 2(21) of the MV Act Whether transport vehicles are excluded from it 2. Whether 'transport vehicle' and 'omnibus' the "gross vehicle weight" of either of which does not exceed 7500 kg. would be a "light motor vehicle" and also motor car or tractor or a road roller, "unladen weight" of which does not exceed 7500 kg. and holder of a licence to drive the class of "light motor vehicle" as provided in Sec. 10(2)(d) would be competent to drive a transport vehicle or omnibus, the "gross vehicle weight" of which does not exceed 7500 kgs. or a motor car or tractor or road roller, the "unladen weight" of which does not exceed 7500 kgs.
(3.) What is the effect of the amendment made by virtue of Act No. 54 of 1994 w.e.f. 14.11.1994 while substituting Clauses (e) to (h) of Sec. 10(2) which contained "medium goods vehicle", "medium passenger motor vehicle", "heavy goods vehicle" and "heavy passenger motor vehicle" by "transport vehicle" Whether insertion of expression 'transport vehicle' Under Sec. 10(2)(e) is related to said substituted classes only or it also excluded transport vehicle of light motor vehicle class from the purview of Sections 10(2)(d) and 2(41) of the Act 4. What is the effect of Amendment of Form 4 as to the operation of the provisions contained in Sec. 10 as amended in the year 1994 and whether the procedure to obtain the driving licence for transport vehicle of the class of "Light Motor Vehicle" has been changed " There is a conflict in the aforesaid decisions of this Court with respect to the legal position as to pre-amended and also the post-amendment legal position of the amendment made on 28.3.2001 in the Forms for driving licence. In order to answer the questions, it is necessary to consider the various provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 3. Sec. 3 of the Act deals with the necessity for driving licence which is extracted hereunder: "S.3. Necessity for driving licence.-- (1) No person shall drive a motor vehicle in any public place unless he holds an effective driving licence issued to him authorising him to drive the vehicle; and no person shall so drive a transport vehicle [other than 1[a motor cab or motor cycle] hired for his own use or rented under any scheme made under sub-section (2) of Sec. 75] unless his driving licence specifically entitles him so to do. (2) The conditions subject to which sub-section (1) shall not apply to a person receiving instructions in driving a motor vehicle shall be such as may be prescribed by the Central Government." 1. Subs. by Act 54 of 1994, sec. 3, for "a motor cab" (w.e.f. 14-11-1994)." It is apparent from the provisions contained in Sec. 3 that it is necessary to have a licence to drive a motor vehicle in any public place and in order to drive a transport vehicle, the driving licence must specifically entitle him to do so. The question is what is the meaning to be given to 'transport vehicle' under Sec. 3. ;