ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. MOHAMMAD WALL AHMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four appeals are the products of the common award rendered in O.P.Nos.255/88, 256/88, 258/88 and 257/88 respectively by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Warangal dated 6-11-1990 in the claim petitions under Sec.110-A of the M.V. Act (in short, the Act) fastening the liability on the 3rd respondent/insurer/ appellant to pay the compensation in all the cases. The insurer denied the liability to pay the compensation in view of the fact that gratutious passengers who were carried in the vehicle involved in the accident are not covered by the risk under the terms of the policy and the Tribunal was wrong in mulcting the insurer in liability in paying the compensation. Mr. Kota Subba Rao, the learned Counsel for the appellant in all the appeals has tried to drive home such a contention by relying upon New India Assurance Co. Ltd, vs. Shanti Bai Preniner Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. V. Siromanamma and others and Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. B. Sitharam Singh.

(2.) Mr. P. Keshav Rao, the learned Counsel for the respondents/claimants has tried to support the award.

(3.) The accident occurred on 16-5-1988 at about 7.30 a.m., while the deceased Asiya Begum and the other claimants were travelling in the lorry AAG 4299 belonging to the 2nd respondent, insured with the third respondent and driven by the 1st respondent in the O.Ps. The claimants pleaded that the petitioner in O.P. No.255/88 was travelling with the luggage of 2 cots, 2 chairs and one rice bag and 2 sevian bags and 3 suit cases containing clothes and beedings along with the other members of the family who are the claimants in the other O.Ps. The Tribunal found that the accident was due to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle. It was also found that the vehicle was insured with the appellant/insurer as evidenced by the certificate of insurance, Ex.B-1. The Tribunal pointed out that the policy does not say as to what is the liability and how these persons were travelling in the vehicle with their luggage. However, without going into the details of the basis on which the liability was imposed, the Tribunal made all the respondents jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.