ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. NIRMALA TOPPO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 19.8.97 passed in M.A. No. 555/93 (R), whereby the learned single Judge allowed the appeal in part and reduced the amount of compensation.

(2.) MISCELLANEOUS Appeal No. 555/93 (R) was filed by the Insurance Company against the judgment and award passed by 6th Additional Judicial Commissioner - cum -Motor Vehicle Claims Tribunal, Ranchi in Claim Case No. 102/88. It appears that a claim petition was filed for grant of compensation on the ground of death of Raju Lawrence Toppo, who was hit by Bus No. BPN 5317 while going on motorcycle. The case of the complainant was that at the time of accident Raju Lawrence was serving as an Assistant in the Office of A.P.O. South Eastern Railway, Bokaro and was getting a salary of Rs. 1200/ -The owner of the bus filed written statement stating, inter alia, the bus in question was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company under a comprehensive policy of insurance being No. 31635/3/0/MV/7376/ 87 (comprehensive) and, therefore, the amount of compensation would be payable by the Insurance Company. The Insurance Company also contested the case by filing written statement stating, inter alia, that the liability of the Insurance Company was limited as per provisions under Section 95(2)(b -1) of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Claims Tribunal assessed the compensation at Rs. 2,16,000/ -. The Tribunal further held that claimants are entitled to Rs. 1,28,000/ - together with 12% interest and the entire amount is payable by the Insurance Company because the vehicle was insured with it with unlimited liability. Aggrieved by the said judgment and award the Insurance Company preferred an appeal before this Court being MA No. 555/93 (R) challenging the quantum of compensation and also the extent of liability of the Insurance Company. The learned single Judge reassessed the compensation and held that claimants would be entitled to compensation of Rs. 1,18,000/ -. However, the learned single Judge has not recorded any finding on the issue of the extent of liability of the Insurance Company. Hence this appeal.

(3.) WE have perused Ext. A. the certificate of insurance, which shows that the vehicle was having the carrying capacity of 52 passengers and a premium of Rs. 12/ - for each passenger i.e., total Rs. 624/ - was paid by the owner of the vehicle. It is also mentioned in the certificate that passengers liability was Rs. 15,000/ -. There is nothing mentioned in the policy that the owner of the vehicle paid the additional premium of Rs. 2,858/ - for coverage of unlimited liability. Perhaps the Tribunal has committed error of record in holding that the additional premium was paid at Rs. 2,858/ - but from the certificate of insurance, it appears that even no additional premium for coverage of unlimited liability to 3rd party was paid by the insured. The learned single Judge has not discussed in the judgment the validity of the award passed by the Tribunal, so far as the appellant -Insurance Company is concerned.