NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. NATARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these Civil Revision Petitions and Civil Miscellaneous Appeals arise out of one motor accident that had occurred on 27.6.1983. The Tribunal below rendered separate but identical orders in each case except the quantum of compensation.

(2.) WHEN these matters were taken up for final disposal, neither the learned counsel appearing for the owner of the vehicle nor the Insurance Company challenged the quantum of compensation awarded to the respective claimants. Therefore, common arguments were addressed on two common issues, namely, (a) Whether the owner of the vehicle is liable to pay compensation in view of the stand taken by him to the effect that the driver had taken the vehicle without the knowledge and consent of the owner or his agent for unauthorised trip, namely, to carry the petitioners/appellants for a funeral ceremony at a nearby village, and (b) Assuming that the owner is held liable, even then can the Insurance company be held liable as the vehicle was not in its authorised use at the time of accident and it was used for a purpose other than the one for which vehicle was intended.

(3.) THE substance of the counter of the second respondent was to the effect that the vehicle insured was not an ordinary type of lorry, but it was a tipper authorised to carry goods alone, that in case of necessity, while the goods are transported, three persons alone are permitted to travel in the cabin, including the driver, and that at the time of accident, the vehicle was not used for transport of goods, but was used unauthorisedly for carrying the quarry workers for the funeral ceremony of one Jayagopal at Vinayagapuram village, and so second respondent was not liable to pay any compensation. THE allegation that the petitioners were working as loadmen at the time of accident was false and the same was made in order to have a claim. THE petitioners were not the employees of the first respondent.