Decided in Favour of :
Respondent
Appeal Dismissed

D.H. Waghela, J.—These appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (“the Act” for short) are preferred by two insurance companies from the awards made under Section 163-A of the Act and, having involved common question of law, they are disposed by this common judgment after hearing arguments in extenso at the admission stage.

2. In First Appeal No. 2042 of 2007, the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. has challenged the award in MACP No. 340 of 2001 awarding compensation of Rs. 4,62,839/- with cost and interest @ 7.58 p.a. to the heirs of deceased P. Balakrishna, aged 29, who met with an accident on 19.11.2000 at 7.30 p.m. on Gandhidham-Kandla Highway while driving the scooter which slipped due to some obstruction on the road and who succumbed to his injuries on 23.11.2000. The Claims Tribunal turned down the plea of the insurance company that the deceased himself was a tortfeasor and, due to his own negligence, he sustained injuries and died even as the owner of the vehicle and the employer of the deceased did not contest the claim. It was also unsuccessfully argued that the employer had not paid additional premium of Rs. 25/- for covering the risk of his employee and hence the insurance company was not liable to pay any amount of compensation. It was contended on behalf of the claimant that the accident had happened due to full lights of the vehicles coming from the opposite side and the scooter of the deceased had slipped due to some obstruction on the road which might not have been notice.

3. In First Appeal No. 5109 of 2007, the deceased was a driver and owner of a carrier rikshaw which rammed into a dumper which was parked on the road on 29.11.2004 on Porbandar-Kutiyana Highway. It was contended that Opponent No. 1 had so kept the dumper on the road as to make an obstruction. The present appeal is preferred by the insurance company of the dumper to challenge its liability to pay total compensation of Rs. 4,15,000/- with cost and interest @ 7% p.a.

4. In First Appeal No. 5315 of 2007, the National Insurance Co. Ltd. has challenged the award in MACP No. 33 of 2006 whereunder it is held to be jointly and severally liable to pay to the claimant the sum of Rs. 2,92,500/- with cost and interest @ 7.5% p.a. in a case in which, on 04.07.2005, deceased pillion rider on a motorcycle was killed on the National Highway No. 8, Near Piplaj Chokdi where the jeep of Opponent No. 1 dashed with the motorcycle. The appellant as the insurance company for the motorcycle unsuccessfully contended that no premium was paid for pillion rider and hence it could not be held liable, jointly and severally, to indemnify the owner of the motorcycle, even as the driver of the motorcycle was not holding a valid licence and the accident had occurred due to sole negligence on the part of the driver.

5. In First Appeal No. 5329 of 2007, the National Insurance Co. Ltd., has challenged the award and order in MACP No. 259 of 2006 whereunder the opponents were ordered to jointly and severally pay Rs. 3,42,552/- with cost and interest @ 7.5% p.a. for death of the pillion rider while his father was driving the vehicle on 06.09.2000 and a truck had come from behind and dashed with the motorcycle. It was contended by the insurance company that drivers of both the vehicles were not holding a valid licence. The owner of the truck had denied the allegation of ownership of the truck.

6. The arguments on behalf of the appellants could be summarised as under :

(a) A tortfeasor or heirs of a tortfeasor himself are not entitled to compensation under the provisions of Section 163-A of the Act;

(b) The insurance company is an “authorized insurer” as far as risk of third party is concerned and, if risk of the deceased or insured person were not covered by the policy, the insurer cannot be held liable to pay to the person entitled to the benefit of the decree even if award were obtained against any person insured by the policy. The terms and conditions of the policy ca