IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
ASHUTOSH SHASTRI, J.
Chatur Dhedia Rathwa & Anr. - Appellants
Versus
Abdul Sattar Idrishbhai Pathan & Others – Defendants
R/First Appeal No. 2472 of 2008 With R/First Appeal No. 2002 of 2008 With R/First Appeal No. 2003 of 2008 With R/First Appeal No. 2004 of 2008 With R/First Appeal No. 2770 of 2008 With R/First Appeal No. 2771 of 2008 With R/First Appeal No. 2772 of 2008
Decided On : 13-02-2023
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 173, 147 - Motor Accident - Compensation - Appeals are filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act in connection with common judgment and award passed - Judgment and award is sought to be requested to be modified - Held, Tribunal has erroneously applied multiplier of 12 and income which has been assumed by learned Tribunal was also found to be on very lower side and as such, has submitted that deceased was doing a labour work and was earning Rs.70-80/- per day, calculation chart was submitted on basis of principle of fair and reasonable compensation - It appears to this Court that calculation submitted is found to be reasonable considering methodology applied by calculating ultimate compensation - So Court considers, deem it fit to accept same and after deducting amount which has already been awarded, further amount of compensation as indicated in tabular form is accepted - To that extent First Appeal is allowed and opponents except appellant Insurance Company namely Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., i.e. opponent no. 3 in this appeal, other opponents are liable to pay said amount of compensation – Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT :
1. Present batch of First Appeals are filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act in connection with common judgment and award passed on 1.3.2007 by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux. Judge), Fast Track Court No.4, Vadodara.
2. Since common judgment and award is sought to be requested to be modified, separate first appeals have been filed in respect of each claim petition, details whereof would be provided hereunder, but few facts related to controversy are taken from First Appeal No.2472 of 2008 for sake of convenience.
3. In First Appeal No.2472 of 2008, original claimants have asserted that son of appellant namely Ramanbhai Chaturbhai Rathwa was going from Chhota Udepur to Vapi-Navsari for labour work with his wife and sister on 5.12.2003 at 7.30. a.m. with goods in Truck No.GJ-17 X-2289. When they reached near Pathakvadi Vyara- Unai Road, respondent No.1 -truck driver driving his truck in full speed in rash and negligent manner lost control over steering and as such, truck turned turtle. As a result of accident, deceased, his wife and sister sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot. On account of such unnatural and untimely death, a claim petition was submitted before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Vadodara claiming compensation of Rs.4 lakh. This First Appeal relates to Claim Petition No.382 of 2004.
4. On the basis of documentary evidence as well as oral evidence tendered by both the sides and after full-fledged adjudication, learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal was pleased to partly allow the claim petition of the claimants and awarded an amount of Rs.2,07,800/- with 8% interest and cost vide judgment and award dated 1.3.2007 and it is this judgment and award which is requested to be modified by enhancing the compensation by way of present First Appeal.
5. Except First Appeal No.2472 of 2004, in other cognate First Appeals in this group, original opponent No.3- i.e. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. has challenged common judgment and award dated 1.3.2007 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux. Judge) Fast Track Court No.4, Vadodara in respective claim petitions, by basically contending that deceased were traveling in a goods vehicle and accident occurred after amendment of Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act, i.e. 14.11.1994, whereas accident had occurred on 5.12.2003 without any goods and as such, risk of passengers traveling goods vehicle was not covered by insurance policy and as such, since risk is not covered by insurance policy as they were gratuitous passengers, question of shifting liability upon present Insurance Company does not arise and as as such, has requested to allow the batch of first appeals insofar as it relates to liability of Insurance Company under the award is concerned.
6. Since the original claim petitions were arising out of the very same accident, said claim petitions were clubbed together and by common judgment and award, as indicated above, a decision is taken, which is made subject matter of present set of appeals. As indicated above, one First Appeal No.2472 of 2008 is related to seeking enhancement of compensation, whereas other appeals are filed by Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. for requesting not to fasten liability as is impermissible. These First Appeals have been ordered to be heard together and in aforesaid background of facts, same have come up for consideration before this Court.
7. Learned advocates appearing for Insurance Companies in aforesaid First Appeals have contended that on 5.12.2003, i.e. much after amendment which took place in Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act, and that being so, question of shifting liability of compensation on Insurance Companies is out of place. It has been contended that conclusion arrived at by learned Tribunal that Insurance Company would be held liable is quite contrary to the State provision, hence orde
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Bommithi Subbhayamma & Ors.
National Insurance Co. Ltd., v. Bommithi Sybbhayamma
Manuara Khatun and others Vs. Rajesh Kumar Singh and others reported in 2017 ACJ 1031
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in 2017 ACJ 2700
Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu Ram and others reported in 2018 ACJ 2782
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Satinder Kaur and others reported in 2020 ACJ 2131
Manuara Khatun v. Rajesh Kr. Singh reported in 2017 (4) SCC 796
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Devireddy Konda Reddy
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Ajit Kumar
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Challa Bharathamma and Ors.
Pramod Kumar Agrawal and Anr. v. Mushtari Begum (Smt.) and Ors.
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. V. Chinnamma and Ors.
Ramesh Kumar v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. (2001) 6 SCC 713
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Asha Rani and Others (2003) 2 SCC 223
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation for unauthorized passengers in goods vehicles, based on the interpretation of relevant....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Insurance Company cannot be held responsible for the compensation of unauthorized passengers in a goods vehicle when the risk is not cover....
Insurer of goods carriage not liable for gratuitous passengers' death/injuries; no 'pay and recover' direction by Tribunal, as lacks Supreme Court's Article 142 power.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Insurance Company is not liable to cover the risk of passengers traveling in a goods carriage vehicle under the Motor Vehicles Act.
Point of Law : Insurance Company was directed to pay compensation even for gratuitous passenger considering circumstances of this case under the “Doctrine of Pay and Recover” from the driver and owne....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.