( 1 ) IN these miscellaneous first appeals presented under Section 110-d of the Motor Vehicles Act by the national insurance company limited, a division bench of (his court has referred ihe following question of law for the opinion of the full bench under seclion 7 of the Karnataka High Court Act. The question reads: whelhcr by force of clause (ii) of the proviso to seclion 95 (l) (b) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, the insurance company is liable to pay compensation in respect of death or bodily injury to any person travelling in a vehicle, though it is not a vehicle constructed and adapted and meant in law for carrying passengers for hire or reward, even to the extent of number of passengers permitted to be carried in the vehicle though not for hire or reward, even in the absence of any extra coverage secured by the owner under the policy concerned in respect of such passengers?

( 2 ) BRIEF facts of the case, in the first batch of cases which are sufficient for answering the question referred for the opinion of the full bench, are as follow:- the vehicle involved in the accident is a goods vehicle bearing registration No. Myx 6827 belonging to respondent No. 3 in m. f. a. No. 2902/1987. On 26-2-1986, it was plying from panditha hally to saligrama in mandya district, carrying 15 passengers. The lorry met with an accident in the course of the journey. As a result of the said accident 10 persons died and 5 persons were injured. The legal representatives of the persons who died, as also the persons who were injured in the accident presented claim petitions before the motor accidents claims tribunal, mandya, claiming compensation in respect of the death or bodily injury, as the case may be, to the passengers. The plea of the appellant-insurance company with, whom the vehicle was insured, before the tribunal was that the vehicle in question was a goods vehicle and it was not meant to carry passengers for hire or reward and therefore the risk in respect of death or injury to persons who were travelling in the goods vehicle was not covered in terms of Section 95 of the Act, as also in terras of the policy issued. It was further pleaded by the insurance company that even on the basis that in the lorry a few persons were permitted to be carried according to the permit, unless an extra coverage had been taken by the owner of the lorry covering the risk to the passengers to the extent permitted to be carried in the vehicle, there would be no liability on the part of the insurance company. The tribunal, however, overruled the objections of the insurance company on the ground that persons who were travelling in the vehicle were not gratuitous passengers and made the award both against the owner of the lorry and its insurer. The relevant particulars of the cases are as follows:

Sl. No.

M. F. A. No.

M. V. C. No.

Case of death or injury

Amount Awarded in Rs

1

2

3

4

5

1.

2902/87

91/86

Death

26. 800/-

2.

2969/87

109/86

Death

29,600/-

3.

2970/87

110/86

Injury

75,000/-

4.

2971/87

127/86

Injury

10,000/-

5.

2972/87

111/86

Death

55,120/-

6.

2973/87

99/86

Death

29,800/-

7.

2974/87

98/86

Death

39,400/-

8.

2975/87

95/86

Death

24,800/-

9.

2976/87

93/86

Death

46,600/-

10.

2977/87

107/87

Death

78. 400/-

11.

2978/87

108/86

Death

38,920/-

12.

2979/87

130/86

Death

42,160/-

13.

2980/87

128/86

Injury

10,000/-

14.

2981/87

140/86

Injury

25,000/-

15.

2982/87.

139/86

Injury

7,500/-

aggrieved by the orders of the tribunal, the appellant presented the appeals.

( 3 ) IN the appeals, the contention of the appellant-insurance company again was that having regard to Section 95 of the Act, it was obligatory for the insurance company to cover the risk only in respect of passengers who are carried for hire or reward in a vehicle which in law is authorised to carry passengers for hire or reward and that as the vehicle in question was a goods vehicle, in law, it was not a vehicle in which passengers could be carried for hire or reward and therefore the risk was not covered by

Click Here to Read the rest of this document