The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Insurance Company cannot avoid liability based on the violation of territorial limits of the permit under the M.V. Act Section 149(2)(a)(i)(c) and Section 66.

JUDGMENT :

Bellunke A.S., J.

1. Though this matter is listed for admission, with the consent of both the counsels on record, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

2. This appeal has been preferred by the respondent Insurance Company against the judgment and award passed in M.V.C. No. 1737/2016 dated 28.03.2017 on the file of the learned V Addl. Dist. & Sessions Judge & Member, Addl. MACT-VI, Belagavi (for short 'Tribunal').

3. The brief facts for the purpose of this appeal are as under:

That, on 12.06.2016, the respondent No.1 and deceased Tukaram had gone to Sangola market along with other three persons to purchase animals in a tempo bearing Regn. No. KA-23-9237 and after purchasing the animals they loaded the said animals in the said tempo and they were returning. The respondent No.1 drove the said vehicle in high speed, in a rash and negligent manner and so endangering human life. The inmates of the said vehicle requested the respondent No.1 to drive the vehicle smoothly, when the said vehicle came near Siddewadi on Miraj-Pandarapur road, the respondent No.1 could not control the vehicle and caused the vehicle turtle down on the road. On account of the said impact, the deceased sustained grievous injuries. Immediately the deceased was shifted to Civil Hospital, Miraj, and thereafter he was shifted to KLE Hospital, Belagavi. The deceased Tukaram ultimately died in the hospital on 16.06.2016.

4. It is contended that the deceased was an employee of respondent No.1, the owner of the goods vehicle bearing Regn. No. KA-23-9237. It is contended that the deceased was hale and healthy as on the date of his death. The petitioners being the wife, son and parents, were wholly dependent on the income of the deceased. He was earning Rs.7,000/- per month. On account of the accident which took place due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle, the petitioners have suffered loss of dependency and loss of love and affection. They have incurred huge medical expenses. Therefore, they filed claim petition before the jurisdiction MACT claiming just compensation for the death of the deceased. The petition was resisted by the respondents, both owner as well as the insurer.

5. The fact that the deceased was a Coolie in the vehicle, was not in dispute. The owner has denied the other allegations. The insurance company denied the fact that the deceased was Coolie in the offending vehicle. According to the respondent-Insurance Company he was a gratuitous passenger in a goods vehicle. Therefore, they had not covered the risk of the said person. It is further contended that Coolie of the offending vehicle was not covered and no additional premium was collected by the respondent No.2. Therefore, the respondent-Insurance Company has contended that it is not liable to satisfy the award that may be passed in the said case.

6. Based on the above said case, the learned Tribunal has framed the following issues:

(1) Whether the petitioners prove that on 12.06.2016, the deceased Tukaram Patil, was traveling in goods vehicle bearing Regn. No. KA-23-9237, from Sangola Market towards the native place, the driver of said vehicle was driving the same in high speed, in a rash and negligent manner, so as to endanger the human life, when the said vehicle came near Siddewadi, on Miraj- Pandarapur road, the driver lost control over it, caused to turtle down on the side of the road, due to it, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and died in the Hospital?

(2) Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, from whom at what quantum?

(3) What order or award?

The learned Tribunal held trial of the petition. After hearing both the sides, issues were answered as under:

Issue No. 1 : In the affirmative Issue No. 2 : In the affirmative Issue No.3 : As per the final order, for the following reasons

Consequently the Tribunal granted com