ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LIMITED Vs. BHANUMATIBEN RAMSINH PARMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Oriental Insurance Company Limited has preferred the present appeal from judgment and award dated 18-4-1992 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special) Porbandar in MACP No.177/1991, whereby respondent nos.1 to 3 herein were awarded, by way of compensation, Rs.4,65,000/- with interest and cost. The factual background of the case of the claimants was that the deceased, while serving as a Sub Inspector, was transferred to Ahmedabad due to which he was carrying his household goods by paying fare of Rs.500/- in the truck which met with accident on 4-11-1991. After recording evidence and noting the fact that the deceased was not a gratuitous passenger, the tribunal was pleased to award compensation as aforesaid.

(2.) The appeal was pressed by the insurance company only on the ground that the policy taken by the owner of the vehicle did not cover risk to the passenger carried in the goods vehicle, which was insured. Learned senior counsel, Mr.Rajni Mehta, submitted that the issue arising in this appeal was squarely covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Asha Rani and Others (2003 ACJ 1). It is held therein that the insurer will not be liable for paying compensation to the owner of goods or his authorized representative on being carried in a goods vehicle when the vehicle meets with an accident and the owner of goods or his representative dies or suffers any bodily injury.

(3.) Learned counsel, Mr.V.G.Dave appearing with Mr.Y.S.Lakhani for the original claimants, respondent nos.1 to 3, fairly conceded that the accident in the present case having occurred before the amendment of 1994 in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 the issue was covered by the aforesaid judgment and hence, insurance company cannot be held to be liable to satisfy the award made against the owner or driver of the vehicle. Therefore, the appeal is partly allowed with the direction that the impugned award shall stand set aside as far as the appellant insurance company is concerned. It is needless to clarify that the claimants shall be entitled to recover the amount of remaining compensation from respondent no.4.