GAUTAM SINGH Vs. MOSMAT LALMATI KUAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the claimants (respondent no. 1 to 4) and learned counsel for National Insurance Company Ltd. (respondent no. 5).

(2.) THIS Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 24.12.2003 by which the learned 9th Addl. District Judge, Saran at Chapra allowed Claim case No. 30 of 2002 filed by respondents no. 1 to 4 and directed the owner -cum driver of the vehicle, namely the appellant, to pay the compensation. It may be stated here that in the instant appeal, there is no dispute with regard to quantum of the award and interest thereupon as fixed by the court below and the only question involved in this case is as to whether the liability to pay the compensation + interest was rightly fixed by the court below upon the appellant.

(3.) THE Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act ' for the sake of brevity) came into force on 1.7.1989 vide Standing order No. 368 (E) dated 22nd May, 1989 in exercise of powers conferred by sub -section (3) of Sec.1 of the Act. Before coming into force of the said Act, everyone including the owner, passenger and the gratuitous passenger of a goods vehicle were to be covered under the insurance policy as was also held by the Hon ble Apex Court in case of Mallawwa (Smt.) and others V/s. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and others, reported in (1999)1 Supreme Court Cases 403. However, after coming into force of the said Act on 1.7.1989, its provisions of law clearly show that the insurance policy would not cover either owner of the goods or passenger or any gratuitous passengerwhich was upheld by the Hon ble Apex court in case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. V/s. Asha Rani and Others, reported in (2003)2 Supreme Court Cases 223 [: 2003(1) PLJR (SC)213]. However, on 14.11.1994, Amending Act 54 of 1994 came into force and by the amended provision of Sec.147 it was provided that only owner of the goods or his authorized representative carrying the goods in the vehicles would be covered under the insurance policy, whereas the other passengers, gratuitous passengers, etc. would not be covered under the said Act which was also upheld by the aforesaid decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs Asha Rani and others (supra).