- (1.) These two appeals are taken for disposal as both the appeals arise out of the common award dated 10.01.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hisar. One has been filed by the Insurance Company seeking recovery rights, the second appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation. Halta @ Hemlata suffered injuries in an accident, which took place on 09.04.2009. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 92,000/- as compensation for the injuries suffered by her. A specific finding was recorded that there was no violation of the terms and conditions of the policy, therefore, the compensation was directed to be paid by the insurance company. F.A.O. No. 3419 of 2011 The plea of the appellant in this appeal is that the driver was driving a transport vehicle but he had a driving licence to drive a light motor vehicle and it was mandatory to get an endorsement to drive a transport vehicle, therefore, the insurance company seeks recovery rights. F.A.O. No. 3508 of 2011 The second appeal was filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation but there is no appearance on behalf of the appellant. On going through the record, it is found that there is no permanent disability but the appellant was seeking enhancement on various other heads. A reading of the award shows that no amount was awarded for transportation or for attendant charges, therefore, the appeal is partly allowed and a sum of Rs. 10,000/- is awarded for transportation. Rs. 5,000/- is awarded on account of attendant charges giving a total increase of Rs. 15,000/-. F.A.O. No. 3419 of 2011 The contention raised on behalf of the appellant is that the driver was driving a transport vehicle but there was no endorsement by the Transport Department and before 28.03.2001 an endorsement to drive a transport vehicle was not necessary but here the accident had taken place in the year 2009, therefore, an endorsement was necessary and they should be given recovery rights to recover the amount from the driver and owner of the vehicle as there was violation of the terms and conditions of the policy. Reliance was placed upon Oriental insurance Company v. Lekh Ram & Ors.,2012 2 ACJ 933(Him. Prad.). The accident in the present case had taken place in 2009. The driver was driving a transport vehicle but he was holding a licence to drive LMV. Earlier the view was that a driver, who was given a licence to drive LMV would include its ambit both transport and non transport vehicles but in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Annappa Irappa Nesaraia and others, 2008 4 ACC 169 (SC) the view taken was that the insurance company is not liable to indemnify the insured where the accident occurs after 29.03.2001.
(2.) In view of the above, the appeal of the insurance company is allowed. The amount already paid can be recovered by them by filing an execution petition. The owner and the driver of the vehicle would be liable to pay the enhanced amount of Rs. 15,000/- to the appellant- Halta @ Hemlata in F.A.O. No. 3508 of 2011. Both the appeals are disposed of.;