UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. DIGAMBAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Pankaj Purohit, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Raman Kumar Shah, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The appellant insurance company, who was respondent no.2 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pauri Garhwal in MACP No. 47 of 2009 has assailed the award passed by the Tribunal directing it to pay a sum of Rs.3,12,000.00 with 7 % interest to the claimants.

(3.) This appeal involves a limited question, i.e., whether on the face of violation of permit granted to the operator of the commercial vehicle, the insurance company should be made liable to pay the compensation. Learned counsel Mr. Pankaj Purohit appearing for the appellants submits that in this case, the vehicle involved was allowed to carry 7 passengers, but at the time of the accident it was carrying 15 passengers in the vehicle, hence the incident took place. He also put forth the grievance of the Insurance Company that in total 8 claim applications have been made and as far as the first 7 claim applications, the Insurance Company has already satisfied the awards. But, they are aggrieved by the award in this case is because of the fact that the Insurance Company has not been given the right of recovery from the owner. In this case, he relies upon several judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and, specially in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Anjana Shyam and others, reported in (2007) 7 SCC 445. In the aforesaid case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the insurance policy taken out for the number of the permitted persons can only determine the liability of the insurance company in respect of those passengers. In terms of the Sec. 149 of the Act, the duty of the Insurance Company is only to satisfy the insured in respect of the third party. Obviously, that is to say the third party is coverable and is covered. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further held that Sec. 149 of the Act could not be understood as compelling the Insurance Company to make payments of the amounts covered by the policy itself but even in respect of those who are not covered by the policy and who have been loaded in the vehicle against the terms of the permit and against the terms of the conditions of the registration of the vehicle and in terms of the violation of the statute.