Liability of the insurer to pay compensation and recover the same from the vehicle owner in case of a violation of policy conditions under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

JUDGMENT :

Challenge in this M.A.C.M.A. is to the award, dated 08.07.2011 in M.V.O.P.1075 of 2007, on the file of IV-Additional District Judge-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kurnool, (“Tribunal” for short) where under, the Tribunal in a motor vehicle accidents claim, as against the original claim of Rs.1,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the claimant, granted compensation of Rs.47,000/- payable by the respondent Nos.1 and 2.

2. The parties to this M.A.C.M.A will hereinafter be referred to as described before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience.

3. The case of the claimant in the M.V.O.P.No.1075 of 2007 according to the petition averments, in brief, is that:

(i) The claimant is aged about 24 years. He was hale and healthy at the time of the accident. He was working as a Hamali on the tractor and trailer bearing No.AP-21-V-2907 and AP-21-V-2908 (hereinafter will be referred to as “offending vehicle”). On 21.03.2006 in the afternoon, the petitioner along with few hamalies were proceeding in the offending vehicle as its hamalies from Orvakal village to Veldurthy for uploading the stones. The driver of the tractor and trailer i.e., the offending vehicle drove the same with high speed in a rash and negligent manner. At 4.00 pm, on Veldurthy-Ramallakota R&B road near Brahmagundam village, he lost control over the tractor and trailer as a result trailer turned turtle as such all the hamalies including the petitioner fell down along with trailer as a result they received injuries and one of the hamalies died on the spot. The accident occurred was due to rash and negligent act of the driver of the said tractor and trailer. The 1st respondent being the employer of the driver of the offending vehicle and the 2nd respondent being the insurer are responsible to pay the compensation. Though, the petitioner is entitled to claim an amount of Rs.1,40,000/-, he confined his claim only to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-. Hence, the claim.

4. The 1st respondent (the owner of the tractor) filed his counter contending in substance that the 1st respondent validly insured the vehicle with 2nd respondent vide policy bearing No.OG-06-1801-5001-00000226 which is valid from 04.05.2005 to 03.05.2006. The road accident was occurred on 21.03.2006 during the tenure of the policy. If at all the petitioner is entitled for any compensation, it should be against the 2nd respondent alone. The amount claimed by the petitioner is excessive and exorbitant. Hence, the petition is to be dismissed.

5. The 2nd respondent/insurance company got filed a counter resisting the claim of the petitioner and the brief contention of the 2nd respondent is that the tractor and trailer bearing No. AP-21-V-2907 and AP-21-V-2908 which involved in the accident is a goods carriage vehicle and it is meant for the carriage of goods only. At the time of accident, it was carrying unauthorized passengers. The seating capacity of the vehicle is only for driver. At the time of accident, the vehicle was carrying more than one person. At the time of accident, the vehicle was used for the purpose of carrying stones and 2nd respondent issued farmers package policy to the said crime vehicle which is meant for usage of agricultural purpose. However, contrary to the policy, the 1st respondent used the vehicle for commercial purpose and the coolies are not supposed to travel on the goods in the vehicle, as there is no space for travelling coolies in the vehicle. On account of breach of the provisions of the M.V. Act, the 2nd respondent is not liable to pay any compensation. The driver of the tractor and trailer did not possess any valid and effective driving license to drive the offending vehicle. Hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed.

6. On the basis of the above pleadings, the Tribunal settled the following issues for trial :

(1) Whether the petitioner sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident which was occurred on 21.03.2006 at about 4.00 pm on account of rash and negligent driving of t