BRANCH MANAGER Vs. SUMITHRA KHARVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Review Petition in MFA No.5101/2009 is filed by the appellant/petitioner to review the order passed by this court in MFA No.5101/2009(MV) dated 27.8.2014, mainly on the ground that this court has relied upon Ex.P5 cover note produced by the injured claimant without considering the policy issued by the company as per Ex.R1. This court ought to have seen that the policy does not cover the carrying of any passenger in a goods vehicle particularly in a three wheeler goods autorickshaw. Therefore, the said mistake is apparent on the face of the records. Therefore, the impugned order deserves to be reviewed.

(2.) Heard Sri. O. Mahesh., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

(3.) I have carefully perused the records of the Trial Court available once again. This court after considering the rulings cited by the learned counsel and also considering Ex.R1 and as well as Ex.P5 has come to the conclusion that the cover note issued on 24.9.2003 covers one passenger can be carried in the said vehicle. Though the learned counsel submits that under Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the driver is only person statutorily covered. But, by means of issuance of the cover note one passenger was also covered. Though under Ex.R1 it is seen that subsequently, on the next day, when the policy was issued, it did not cover the said one passenger. However, the cover note was issued on payment of same amount of premium for which the policy was subsequently issued.