UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD Vs. RAMKUNWAR BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall also govern the disposal of MA Nos. 1605/2002, 1606/2002, 1821/2002, 1822/2002, 391/2003 and 21/2003 as all the appeals arising out of one accident. So far as MA Nos. 1605/2002, 1606/2002, 1821/2002 and 1822/2002 are concerned, they are arising out of claim case Nos. 42/2002, 46/2002, 47/2002 and 43/2002 vide award dated 25.7.2002 passed by MACT, Ujjain. So far as MA Nos. 391/2003 and 21/2003 are concerned, they are arising out of the claim case Nos. 96/2002 and 43/2002. In both these cases the prayer is for enhancement while in MA Nos. 1605/2002, 1606/2002, 1821/2002 and 1822/2002 the prayer is that the appellant/Insurance Company be exonerated.

(2.) SHORT facts of the case are that a motor accident took place on 2.2.2001 by tractor bearing registration No. MP-13/KB/5828 and trolley bearing registration No. MP-13/HB/7526 which was owned by respondent No. 8 driven by respondent No.7 and insured with appellant. The case of claimants before the learned Tribunal was that all the claimants were travelling in the offending tractor for going to Village Jaloda from Village Jharnawada in a marriage party and sustained injuries. The claim petitions were contested by the appellant on the ground that since the tractor was insured with the appellant for agricultural purpose and was being used at the relevant time for other than agricultural purpose, therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Tribunal committed error in holding that the appellant is liable for the payment of compensation. Reliance has been placed on a decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Satpal Singh . It is submitted that the law laid down in the aforesaid case is not a good law, as the same was overruled by the subsequent decision in the matter of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Asha Rani , wherein it has been held that the judgment of this Court in Satpal's case have not been correctly decided. It was held that Insurance Company will not be liable for paying compensation to the owner of goods or his authorised representatives on being carried in a goods vehicles when the vehicle meets with an accident and the owner of goods or his representatives dies or suffers any bodily injury.