HUKAM CHAND INSURANCE CO. LTD Vs. BADRUDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment shall dispose of four Misc. Civil appeals arising out of two claim cases; which were instituted before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore, under Section 110 -A(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, by the legal representatives of two persons who died in a motor accident. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 119 of 73 and the connected appeal No. 156 of 73 arise out of the claim case No. 156 of 1968 while Civil Misc. Appeal No. 120 of 73 and the connected appeal No. 163 of 73 arise out of the claim case No. 157 of 1968 lodged by the legal representatives of deceased Fakruddin and lnamual, respectively against the owner of the vehicle, its driver and the insurer.

(2.) ON 19 -7 -68 at about 8 p.m. motor truck No. 1673 owned by Bhagwandas dashed against the wall of Gambhir river bridge at Gogargaon and fell into the river when it was coming towards Indore, carrying goats and their keepers Fakruddin and lnamual. On account of the said accident the goats as well as Fakruddin and lnamual died on the spot. The case of the legal representatives of deceased persons in the respective claims petitions was that the accident occurred on account of the rash and negligent driving of the truck by the driver Rameshwar.

(3.) FIRST of all I shall deal with Misc. Appeal No. 119 of 73 and the connected appeal No. 156 of 73. In Misc. Appeal No. 119 of 73, which is filed by the insurer Hukumchand Insurance Co. Ltd., the learned Counsel for the Appellant firstly contended that the deceased Fakruddin was travelling in the truck as an owner of the animals and, therefore, by virtue of the provisions contained in Section 95(1) (b) proviso (ii) of the Motor Vehicles Act the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation on account of death of Fakruddin. In support of this contention the learned Counsel for the Appellant referred to the original claim petition in which it was averred that deceased Fakruddin and lnamual were travelling in the truck as owners of the goats. The contention of the learned Counsel for the Appellant is that the applicants by way of amendment pleaded that deceased Fakruddin and lnamual were travelling in the truck as owners of the goats. The contention of the learned Counsel for the Appellant is that the applicants by way of amendment pleaded that deceased Fakruddin and lnamual were travelling in the truck as servants of the owners of the goats which were being transported simply with a view to fasten the liability on the insurance company. It may be pointed out that the amendment having been allowed by the Claims Tribunal the amended petition only will be looked into to know the case of the applicants. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether there is any evidence to prove that deceased Fakruddin and Inamual were travelling in the truck as servants of the owner of the goats.