( 1 ) THE following question is referred to the Full Bench by the Division Bench consisting of N. H. Bhatt and S. L. Talati JJ. as the said Division Bench was of the view that it was necessary to resolve the conflict arising out of the two inconsistent Division Bench decisions one in State Road Transport v. Malubai reported in 21 G. L. R. 400 deci- ded by B. K. Mehta and S. B. Majmudar JJ. and another in Vanaji v. Shivabhai Kashibhai reported in AIR 1980 Gujarat 154 = 1979 (2)-XX (2) G. L. R. 342 decided by M. K. Shah and D. H. Shukla JJ. :"where the vehicle is on the date of the contract of insurance a vehicle not covered by a permit to ply for hire or reward whether a passenger on payment will get the benefit of the statutory insurance" ?

( 2 ) IN order to appreciate the controversy in its proper perspective it requires to be mentioned that the occasion to make the reference arose in the course of proceedings in which the Insurance Company which had insured a public carrier (Leyland Goods Truck) disclaimed its liability to satisfy the awards made in three different but connected motor accident claim cases on the ground that the vehicle in question was on the date of