NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. MATADIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall govern the disposal of the aforesaid three appeals. In the aforesaid appeals preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act by the appellantsInsurance Company, a challenge has been made to an Award dated 20th October 2002 in claim cases No. 35/2002, 36/2002 and 101/2003, arising out of the same accident, which was passed by the First Additional Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Morena (M.P.) with a prayer for setting aside the findings of the tribunal including the award as according to the averments, the Insurance Company is not statutorily required to cover the liability under section 147 of the Act in respect of passengers travelling in a vehicle.

(2.) The facts, in short, are that on 17th December 2001, deceased Ramjilal and injured Matadeen and Ramesh were travelling from Morena to Gwalior on the mudguard of a tractor bearing registration No. MP06 J 2531 which at the time of accident was owned by Shrilal, driven by Damodar Singh and insured with New India Insurance Company (appellants herein). It is alleged that in way near Highway Hotel, at Police Station Noorabad due to rash and negligent driving, the alleged tractor turned turtle with a trailer causing death of Ramjeelal and injuries to Matadeen and Ramesh. Accordingly, an F.I.R. was lodged against the driver and after investigation, the charge sheet was filed for commission of offence punishable under sections 279, 337 and 304-A of I.P.C. before the criminal court. The learned tribunal after considering the evidence on record passed the award of Rs. 1,66,700/- with interest @ 9% till payment is made, as compensation for the death of Ramjeelal in favour of claimants in claim case No.35/2002, the award of Rs. 50,000/- with interest @ 9% till payment is made, as compensation for injuries caused to Ramesh Singh in claim case No. 36/2002 and the award of Rs. 25,000/- with interest @ 9% till payment is made as compensation for injuries to injured Matadeen in claim case No.101/03, against the owner, driver and the Insurance Company, which was payable jointly or severally. It is submitted that in compliance of the directions, half of the amount of awards is deposited with the tribunal by the appellants/Insurance Company.

(3.) The submissions put forth by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants/Insurance Company are that the offending vehicle was insured for agriculture and forestry purpose and the policy did not cover liability for hire or reward purposes. No additional premium was paid for transporting/carrying the passengers for hire or gratuitous purposes. It is submitted that at the time of accident, the deceased and injured were travelling on the mudguard of the tractor which was in violation of the terms and conditions of the policy and the provisions of the relevant rules under the Act. Hence, on the basis of the aforesaid, it is prayed that by allowing the appeals, the Award passed against the appellants may be set aside and the directions may be given to the owner and the driver to pay the amount to the claimants. It is further prayed that the amount deposited by the Insurance Company may be released.