SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(SC) 844

DORAISWAMY RAJU, ARIJIT PASAYAT
National Insurance Co. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
Ajit Kumar – Respondent


Judgement Key Points

Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points regarding the liability of insurers for passengers in goods vehicles:

  • Insurer Liability Determination: The insurer is not liable to pay compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the death or bodily injury of a person traveling in a goods vehicle as a passenger. [judgement_subject] (!) (!)
  • Legislative Intent and Terminology: The difference in language between "goods vehicle" in the old Act (1939) and "goods carriage" in the new Act (1988) is significant. The old Act allowed goods vehicles to carry passengers "in addition to passengers," whereas the new Act defines "goods carriage" as solely for the carriage of goods, implying a prohibition on carrying passengers. (!) (!)
  • Absence of Compulsory Insurance Provision: Unlike the old Act (Section 95 proviso clause ii), the new Act (Section 147) does not contain a provision requiring compulsory insurance coverage for passengers in goods carriages. (!)
  • Statutory Coverage Limits: Section 147 of the Act mandates compulsory coverage only for "public service vehicles" and limits coverage for employees carried in goods vehicles to liabilities under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, with no reference to general passengers. (!)
  • Conclusion on Statutory Liability: The provisions of the Act do not impose any statutory liability on the owner of a vehicle to get it insured for any passenger traveling in a goods carriage; consequently, the insurer has no liability. (!)
  • Judicial Precedent: This view is supported by the decision in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Asha Rani and Ors. (2003 (2) SCC 223). (!)
  • Outcome: The appeals were allowed, setting aside the judgment of the Tribunal and the High Court. (!)

JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J.-Leave granted.

2. The only question raised in these appeals is whether the insurer is liable to pay the compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short the Act ) for the death or bodily injury to a person traveling in goods vehicle as passenger. Liability of the insurer was fixed by relying on this Court s decision in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Satpal Singh (2000(1) SCC 237).

3. Factual aspects need not be gone into in detail, as there is practically no dispute on the factual aspects.

4. Learned counsel for the insurer-appellant submitted that Section 149(2) of the Act is etymologically different from proviso (ii) to Section 96(2)(b) of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the old Act ) and, therefore, the ratio in Satpal Singh s case (supra) has no application. In response, learned counsel appearing for the claimants submitted that in the said case such a stand has been negatived and it has been held that insurer is liable to pay compensation to gratuitous passengers.

5. This Court had occasion to deal with cases of passengers traveling in goods vehicles which met with accident resulting in death of such person or bodily i






























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top