NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. JANKI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 29.11.1996 passed by the District Judge-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madhubani, in Claim Case No. 42 of 1996 whereby the claim made under section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act for no fault liability has been allowed.

(2.) The son of the original claimant Janki Devi, namely, Bilatu Nonia met with an accident while travelling from Rajnagar to Madhubani in a tractor bearing registration No. BR 32-0870. The tractor turned turtle as a result of which the deceased sustained several injuries and ultimately succumbed to his injuries. The police case was registered being Rajnagar P.S. Case No. 19 of 1996. The admitted position remains that the tractor in question was insured with the appellant New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and the claim was made for no fault liability. It was objected by the insurance company as the tractor was used against the terms and conditions of the policy the insurance company cannot be bound to make payment under the no fault liability. It was the contention of the insurance company that as per terms and conditions of the policy the tractor was insured solely for the purpose of agriculture and not for any other purpose such as carriage of passengers on the road or any other commercial purpose. The matter was heard from both sides by the learned Tribunal and it came to the finding that such violation of terms and conditions cannot be construed for the purpose of grant of no fault liability compensation as contemplated under section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act and as such Rs. 50,000 has been awarded as interim compensation under no fault liability. In the appeal being preferred by the insurance company the first objection raised by the owner is that the appeal is not maintainable against the order passed under section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, But that question has been raised many times and this court took the view that the appeal is maintainable.

(3.) On the point of terms and conditions learned advocate appearing for and on behalf of the insurance company has referred to a judgment of Apex Court as reported in B.V. Nagaraju v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., 1996 ACT 1178 (SC) and also a single Bench order passed in M.A. No. 323 of 1997 of this court, relying on the above mentioned Supreme Court judgment.