LEEKCHAND SAHU Vs. LAXMAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE propose to dispose of these appeals (M. A. No. 437/99, Leekchand and Anr. v. Laxman Singh and Anr. , M. A. No. 2262/1999, Leekchand and Anr. v. Smt. Amira Bi and Ors. and M. A. No. 2263/1999, Leekchand and Anr. v. Bisram Sahu and Ors.) by this judgment since they arise out of the same accident and similar award.

(2.) ACCIDENT took place on 23-2-1997 with a vehicle bearing Registration No. MP 29/b 0319, owned by Leekchand (dead) (through legal representatives) driven by Shri Ram @ Jagannath, coming from Ramakona to Ulhawadi which turned turtle in the market resulting in death of Noor Moham-mad and Ramdayal Sahu and injuries to Laxman Singh, Kishorilal, Ajab Singh and Gajanand. Claims have been filed by Amira Bi w/o Noor Mohammad, Bisram Sahu father of Ramdayal Sahu, Laxman Singh, Kishorilal, Ajab Singh and Gajanand, in latter cases, for personal injuries. Allegation is that accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by driver. The defence of owners and driver is that accident took place due to the locking of steering wheel, otherwise, the vehicle was being driven cautiously. The Insurance Company has stated that deceased and other claimants were travelling by the vehicle as passengers. Since the vehicle was insured for use as goods vehicle, carrying passengers was prohibited by the Insurance Policy. As such, the Insurance Company was not liable to pay the compensation. It is also submitted that the driver did not possess valid driving licence for driving the vehicle.

(3.) CLAIMS Tribunal framed issues in the case, permitted parties to lead evidence and came to the conclusion that accident took place as alleged resulting in death of Noor Mohammad and Ramdayal and injuries to four persons named above. However, it found that these persons were travelling as passengers and not owners of goods or labourers attached to the vehicle. As a result, the liability to pay the compensation has been fastened on the owner and driver of the vehicle thus exonerating the Insurance Company. Owner and driver have serious objection to the finding exonerating the Insurance Company from meeting the liability for payment of compensation.