Learners can get claims

Can a learner's licence fetch you insurance claims in the event of an accident? In other words, can an insurance company reject the claim...

Can a learner8217;s licence fetch you insurance claims in the event of an accident? In other words, can an insurance company reject the claims on the ground that the driver didn8217;t have a permanent licence? Above this, the very definition of a driving licence can be questioned. Like, does a person who holds a licence to drive a vehicle essentially mean a fully-qualified and regular driver or does this definition also include learners?

These and many other questions that have far-reaching implications for thousands of persons who hold a learner8217;s licence came before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla.

The brief facts, as set out in the pleadings, are that the complainant who was the owner of truck number HIS-3093 got the vehicle insured with an insurance company for a sum of Rs 2 lakh. The vehicle suffered loss due to an accident on way to Khalini on the Bypass Road. The insurance policy admittedly was in force at the relevant time.

The complainant had claimed an amount ofRs 3,59,046. The claim was resisted by the insurance company on the grounds that at the time of accident, the driver of the truck 8212; Rohit Kumar Walia 8212; was not having a valid driving licence but only a learner8217;s licence.

The District Forum, Shimla, had directed the insurance company to pay to the complainant respondent a sum of Rs 1,40,000 along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of filing the complaint. The insurance company then appealed to the state commission in protest of the ruling.

The commission ruled that the person was in possession of learner8217;s licence 8212; which is issued under Section 8 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 8212; and as such it cannot be inferred that he was not having a valid driving licence at the time of accident. It is nobody8217;s case that the driver was disqualified from holding an effective driving licence with all the required endorsements thereon as per the Motor Vehicles Act and the rules made there under.

The insurance company has failed toestablish that the driver of the truck was not having a valid driving licence.

Story continues below this ad

The counsel for the insurance company had relied upon the judgement of the Supreme Court in New India Insurance versus Mandar Madhav Tambe and others.

The insurance company tried to substantiate that the driver having a learner8217;s licence cannot be regarded as a duly licensed driver and that the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation.

The commission observed that the judgement cannot be applied in the facts and circumstances of the present case. In that case, the Supreme Court had held that a driver having a learner8217;s licence cannot be regarded as a duly licenced driver with the meaning of Section 96 2 b ii, as in that case, the accident was caused by a person who held a learner8217;s licence, the validity of which had already expired and the exclusion clause in the insurance policy specifically provided that the person driving the vehicle must hold a valid driving licence or a permanent driving licence otherthan the learner8217;s licence.

In the present case, however, admittedly the learner8217;s licence had not expired and was valid at the time of accident and that there is no aforementioned exclusion clause in the present policy. The appeal of the insurance company was dismissed.

The author is a freelance writer