ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. PHUNDUR BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present is an insurance company appeal under Sec. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The challenge is to the award dtd. 14/1/2015 in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 43/2012 passed by the 3rd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambikapur, Surguja. Vide the impugned award the Tribunal in a death case has awarded the claimants a compensation of Rs.6,06,000.00 with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of application. The liability of payment of compensation has been fastened upon the appellant/insurance company.

(2.) The present appeal has been filed assailing the liability fastened upon the insurance company. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that admittedly an accident took place on 2/2/2010. The deceased in the instant case was Premdas i.e. the husband of the claimant No. 1 and father of the claimants No. 2 to 5. The accident occurred from a Truck bearing registration No. CG-15/A-4010 owned by the respondent No. 6 and driven by the respondent No. 7 at the time of accident that took place on 2/2/2010. The widow and children of the deceased filed the claim application, which stood decided by the impugned award dtd. 14/1/2015 granting compensation to the tune of Rs.6,06,000.00 to the claimants with interest @ 6% p.a. The liability of payment of compensation has been fastened upon the insurance company. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the vehicle involved in the accident was a category of 'Heavy Goods Carrying Commercial Vehicle'. The policy that was issued was a package policy, however no extra premium was paid for any additional person to travel in the said vehicle except for the persons with the sitting capacity of 'two' i.e. the driver and cleaner.

(3.) In the absence of any extra premium paid to the insurance company, the insurance company cannot be held liable to pay compensation for any persons who were traveling in the said vehicle in addition to two for which the policy stood covered. Referring to the evidence of the claimant-the widow before the Tribunal, learned counsel submitted that from the evidence itself it was evidently clear that the deceased along with a group of persons who were standing on the road side for a transportation. Meanwhile as the driver of the offending Truck offered lift on accepting certain charges. As such the deceased and others who were traveling on the Truck became gratuitous passengers and for whom the coverage would not be applicable, nor can the insurance company indemnify the owner for the persons who have been traveling on the said vehicle in contravention to the policy conditions.