NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SARUP DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since all these appeals have arisen out of the same award which was passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sirmour at Nahan, except F.A.O. Nos. 116 and 156 of 2002, as such these have been taken up together for hearing at the joint request of the learned counsel for the parties, who submitted that these be disposed of at the earliest keeping in view the interest of large number of claimants. xxx xxx xxx Admitted facts in all these appeals are, that on the night intervening 7/8.8.2000 bus No. HP-1575 was being driven by late Om Singh alias Bablu, son of Rattan Singh. He was owner-cum-driver of this bus. It was carrying marriage party of Har- dev Singh and was on its way from village Bhauri to Dingar Kinnar. At about 12 midnight, when it reached near village Khana- gan, an attempt was made by the bus driver to overtake Maruti van No. HR-49-2628. This was carrying the bridegroom Hardev Singh. It is also the case of the respondents- claimants that after hitting the Maruti van deceased driver Om Singh lost control of the bus. As a result of it, bus rolled down into the khud. This accident was the result of rash and negligent driving on the part of the deceased driver. Consequently, number of persons died at the spot and some received injuries. One of such persons was RW 7.1 have made special mention of RW 7 because it is the case of appellant that on his statement under section 154, Criminal Procedure Code, F.I.R. in question (Exh. P-l) was registered. Vehicle being insured with the appellant insurance company is not disputed. In fact, defence of the appellant during the course of proceedings before the learned Tribunal below was, and even at the time of hearing of these appeals is, that against the authorised capacity of 40 passengers plus two (driver and conductor), 63 were being carried in the bus in question at the time of its accident. Therefore, this is a clear cut case of proved violation of the terms of contract of insurance Exh. R-7, as well as of route permit whereunder the bus was being plied Exh. R-3. xxx xxx xxx

(2.) Another fact that needs to be noted is that as many as 41 cases were filed before the Tribunal below, one was filed at Solan. Copy of the decision by the Tribunal at Solan is Exh. RX.

(3.) Mr. Ashwani Sharma, the learned counsel for appellant insurance company made the following submissions in support of these appeals: (a) Conditions of the contract of insurance Exh. R-7 as well as route permit Exh. R-3, both have been violated by carrying 63 passengers against the authorised capacity of 40 plus two (driver and conductor), his client is not liable for payment of any compensation. (b) Bus at the time of accident had a stage carriage permit. The place of accident where the bus met with accident was not covered by Exh. R-3. By referring to this document, Mr. Sharma submitted that the bus could be plied as a stage carriage on Solan-Mangarh route via Narag, as per time table. By referring to the place of accident as well as statement of PW 16 and certificate Exh. PW 16/A, produced by this witness, he submitted that the bus admittedly was being used as a contract carriage for carrying baraat (marriage party), from village Bhauri to Dingar Kinnar. As such his client is not liable for payment of any compensation.