NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. AJAY KUMAR PANDEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AMITAVA Lala, J. The appellant contended before this Court that the vehicle in question has been used for the purpose of carrying "barat" on the fateful day when accident took place and 11 years-Anurag sustained injuries and expired. In the entire evidence a statement has been made by the father of the deceased that the jeep by which they were being carried was on hire. At the time of consideration of evidence, the learned Judge 'of the Tribunal held that no document has been produced by which it can be proved that the jeep was carrying the passengers of "barat" on hire. In any event the Tribunal passed an award of compensation of Rs. 1,52,000 to be paid by the owner but by making a stop-gap arrangement directed the insurance company to pay the said sum and recover it from the owner.

(2.) MR. Nagendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel appearing in support of the appellant-insurance company contended before this Court particularly in view of Civil Appeal No. 2609 of 2006, National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Lala Ram and others, an unreported judgment of the Supreme Court dated 9. 5. 2006, that even for the gratuitous passengers, who were neither contemplated at the time the contract of insurance was entered into, nor was any premium paid to the extent of the benefit of the insurance to such category of people, therefore, the insurance company cannot be directed to re- reimburse the owner of the vehicle for the loss caused to the claimant. Claimant/s may recover the awarded amount from the owner of the vehicle or the driver. He has also relied upon the decision in United India Insurance Company Ltd. , Shimla v. Tilak Singh and others, 2o06 ACJ 1279 (SC) : 2006 (2) AWC 2015 (SC), of the self same type. In both the cases we find that the gratuitous passengers were carried out by the goods vehicle. Therefore, it has been rightly held by the Supreme Court that such type of passengers travelling on the goods vehicle/ dumper etc. cannot be made entitled to get compensation from the insurance company even by way of scheme of reimbursement.

(3.) INCIDENTALLY the appellant insurance company prayed that the statutory deposit of Rs. 25,000 made before this Court for preferring this appeal shall be remitted back to the concerned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal as expeditiously as possible in order to adjust with the amount of compensation to be paid to the claimant, however, such prayer is allowed.