CHANDRA ROY Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Although several points are involved in this appeal, only question of law which has surfaced in the rival contentions, is whether the insurance company is entitled to refuse the claim made under section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (section 140 of the Act of 1988), inter alia, on the ground that the subject provision did not make the insurance company liable for the compensation per se.

(2.) We have heard Mr, Krishanu Banik, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Kamal Krishna Das, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

(3.) Both the learned advocates have assisted us with citing the following decisions: (1) National Insurance Co. Ltd. v, Krishna Biswas, 2008 ACJ 480 (Calcutta); (2) Yallwwa v. National Insurance Co. Ltd., 2007 ACJ 1934 (SC); (3) Aloka Pusti (Bera) v. National Insurance Co. Ltd., 2007 ACJ 494 (Calcutta); (4) National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Jethu Ram, 1998 ACJ 921 (SC); (5) United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Jagdish Singh, (1999) 9 SCC 57; and (6) Shivaji Dayanu Patil v. Vatschala Uttam More, 1991 ACJ 777 (SC).