Foreign Driving Licence Valid Does Not Automatically Confer Right To Drive In India: Punjab & Haryana High Court

A Bench of Justice Deepak Gupta, held, "A foreign driving licence does not, merely because it is valid in the country of its issuance, automatically confer a right upon its holder to drive a motor vehicle in India.”

The Court was dealing with an appeal against an award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra, to the limited extent that the Insurance Company had been granted a right to recover the compensation payable by it from the driver and owner of the vehicle.

Advocate Prateek Mahajan appeared for the Appellant and Advocate Vinod Chaudhari appeared for the Respondents.

The accident took place in 2015, in which a nine-month-old lost her life. The Tribunal had awarded compensation of ₹2,49,500 along with interest at 9 per cent per annum and directed the Insurance Company to satisfy the award in the first instance, with liberty to recover the amount from the driver and owner on the finding that the driver did not possess a valid and effective driving licence authorising him to drive the vehicle in India.

The appellant had produced a licence issued by the competent authority in Victoria, Australia. However, the High Court noted that he had admitted in cross-examination that he did not possess any driving licence issued by an Indian licensing authority.

The appellant had asserted that an earlier Indian licence had been deposited with the Australian authority. However, he could not disclose its number, date of issuance, period of validity or even the name of the issuing authority. Neither a copy of the alleged Indian licence nor any record from the concerned authority was produced.

More importantly, the Court noted that the document produced by the appellant was only an Australian domestic driving licence.

“No international driving permit valid for use in India, or any endorsement or authorisation by a competent Indian authority, was produced,” the Court observed.

The Court held that a licence issued by a foreign authority cannot be equated with a driving licence valid under Chapter II of the Motor Vehicles Act merely on the ground that it authorised the holder to drive a similar class of vehicle in the foreign country.

Referring to Section 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the Court observed that the provision prohibits a person from driving a motor vehicle in a public place unless he holds an effective driving licence authorising him to drive that vehicle.

The Court also relied upon its earlier decision in Dilpreet Singh and another v. United India Insurance Company Limited Goryana and others, wherein a licence issued by an authority in Canada, without the requisite endorsement or authorisation of a competent authority in India, was held insufficient to constitute a valid driving licence for driving a vehicle in India.

The appellant had not shown that the Australian licence fulfilled the statutory requirements applicable to a foreign national or a person temporarily visiting India, or that it was accompanied by a valid international driving permit recognised in India.

“The Tribunal, therefore, had committed no error in holding that the appellant was not possessing a valid and effective driving licence at the time of the accident,” the High Court held.

The Court further held that once it was established that the offending vehicle was driven by a person who did not possess a valid and effective driving licence, the insurer was entitled to avoid its contractual obligation to indemnify the insured, subject to its statutory obligation towards third-party victims.

Relying upon the Supreme Court's decisions in National Insurance Company Limited v. Swaran Singh and others and Shamanna and another v. Divisional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited and others, the Court held that the insurer may be directed to satisfy the award in favour of a third-party claimant and thereafter recover the amount from the person liable.

The High Court accordingly dismissed the appeal and held that neither the appellant's subsequent acquittal in the criminal case nor the production of the Australian domestic driving licence furnished any ground to interfere with the recovery rights granted to the insurer.

Cause Title: Sameer Gaba v. Priyanka & Ors., [2026:PHHC:124793]

Appearance:

Appellant: Advocates Prateek Mahajan, Arche Anant

Respondents: Advocate Vinod Chaudhari

Click here to read/download Order