T M VENKATARAJAN Vs. T ABDUL MUNAF SAHIB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE first appellant is the owner, and the second appellant, the insurer, of, a lorry bearing registration number, MDU 5679, which was involved in an accident, as a result of which Hayat Basha, the cl eaner of the lorry, sustained injuries and died on the spot. Respondents Nos. 1 to 8 who are the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased, filed an application 1under section 110a of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Motor A he driver, because the lef t side of the lorry had come into violent collision with the right extremity of a stationary vehicle and the violence of the impact was such that Hayat Basha, the. cleaner. who was in the lorry. was thrown off his seat in front of the vehicle by the side of the driver of the vehicle and the vehicle itself lurched on its right side, and consequently the death of the cleaner was the result of negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry.

(2.) THE learned judge fixed the compensation payable at Rs. 5, 000 and directed the same to be divided among the claimants in the same ratio as they would be entitled to if Hayat had died leaving this fund as his property. THE contention of the insurance company that their liability was specifically excluded under section 95 of the Motor Vehicles Act, as well as under the specific terms of the policy, *as also overruled by the Tribunal. It is against this order that the present appeal has been filed by the owner of the vehicle and the insurer It is contended on behalf of the insurance company that inasmuch as the deceased was an employee of the owner of the vehicle, the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation for his death either under the terms of the insurance policy or under section 95 of the Motor Vehicles act. 1 am unable to accept this contention. Section 2 of the policy of insurance provides that the company will indemnify the insured against all sums which the insurex has become, legally liable to pay in respect of (i) death of or bodily injury to any person caused by or arising out of the use of the motor vehicle. THEre are seven provisos to this clause, of which provisos (b) and (c)are relevant. Proviso (b) runs as followsexcept so far as is necessary to meet the requirements of section 95 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. the company shall not be liable in respect of death or bodily injury to any person in the employment of the insured arising out of and in the course of such employment Proviso (c) runs as follows "except so far as is necessary to. meet the requirements of section 95 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, in relation to liability under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, the company shall not be liable in respect of death of or bodily injury to any person (other than a passenger carried by reason of or in pursuance of a contract of employment)being carried in or upon or entering or mounting or alighting from the motor vehicle at the time of the occurrence of the event out of which any claim arises. " *