P. R. GOKULAKRISHNAN, J.

( 1 ) THE Insurance Company is the appellant Respondents 1 and 2 herein came forward with an application for award of compensation for the death of their son. It is the case of respondents 1 and 2 herein that on 13/06/1978 the deceased was traveling in a rickshaw No. GRS 251 from village Bhat to Sabarmati Tol Naka and when the rickshaw was near the cross-road at Koba Circle and was moving towards Sabarmati Tol Naka at the all of a sudden the rickshaw turned turtle and due to the accident the deceased Ashokkumar Ranchhodbhai Patel received injuries and there- upon he as removed to the hospital and there he succumbed to the said injuries and dice. It was further contended that due to the rash and negligent driving of the 3rd respondent herein the accident occurred and as a result of which the son of respondents 1 and 2 expired. The Insurance Company filed the written statement latter alia contending that the claim filed by respondents 1 and 2 herein is exaggerated that the liability of the Insurance Company is limited to the extent of Rs. 5 0 as provided under the Motor Vehicles Act that the deceased was a gratuitous passenger and was not carried for hire or reward and that therefore the Insurance Company is not liable. It is unnecessary to refer to the contentions of the other opponent in the claim petition. the Tribunal after discussing the evidence came to the conclusion that the applicants who are respondents 1 and 2 herein are entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 20 100 from opponents 1 and 2 in the claim application together with interest thereof at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing the application till payment or realization with proportionate costs. As against this Award the Insurance Company has come forward with the present appeal. Mr. P. V. Nanavaty the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submitted that the Insurance Companys liability as regards the passenger who was traveling in the vehicle which was involved in the accident is limited to Rs. 10 0 and hence the award of Rs. 20 100 made by the Claims Tribunal cannot be sustained.

( 2 ) AS far as the present case is concerned we have gone through the Insurance policy the cover note and the facts of the case. The insurance policy under section II deals with the liability answerable by the Insurance Company. It states:"subject to the limits of liability the Company will namely the insured against all sums including claimants cost and expenses which the insured shall become legally liable to pay in respect of (i ). . . . . . . . . . . . (ii ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "thus we find the words subject to the limits of liability and the words all sums. This was the subject matter of interpretation by a Five Judges Bench of our High Court in First Appeal No. 1439/79 with First Appeals Nos. 1440 and 1441 of 1979 dated 25/01/1985 In that judgment the Bench observed as follows:"the appellant Insurance Company pleads special defense on the basis of the condition in the insurance policy which excludes use of the insured vehicle for carrying passengers for hire or reward. Now so far as the policy ex. 48 is concerned it is an office copy of the insurance policy produced by the appellant company itself. Sec. II of the policy ex. 48 refers to the liability to third parties. It states as under: "subject to the limits of liability the company will indemnify the insured against all sums including claimants cost and expenses which the insured shall become legally liable to pay in respect of (i) death of or bodily injury to any person caused by or arising out of the use (including the loading and or unloading) of the Motor Vehicle. (ii) Damage to property caused by the use (including the loading and or unloading) of the Motor Vehicle. Provided always that (a) The company shall not be liable in respect of death injury or damage caused or arising beyond the limits of any carriage-way or thoroughfare in connection with the bringing of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document