Back
J. C. DOSHI
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Sarojben Ghanshyambhai Siroya – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
J.C. DOSHI, J.
1. This First Appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act (in short ‘the Act’) is filed by the Oriental Insurance Company Limited (in short ‘the Insurance Company’) questioning correctness of the common judgment dated 07.10.2014 passed by the MACT (Auxi.), Anand in MACP No. 1 of 2016 with MACP No. 2 of 2006. This Appeal essentially challenges judgment and award passed in MACP No. 2 of 2006 which is partly allowed holding that Insurance Company is vicariously liable to pay compensation in tune of Rs. 6,39,400/- with interest @ 9% from the date of filing claim petition till realization with proportionate costs to original claimants.
2. Facts leading to filing of this Appeal can be pithily stated as under.
3. On 19.01.2006, deceased Ghanshyambhai Siroya along with Nayankumar Siroya were travelling in Utility Van bearing No. GJ-1-AT-4938 (in short ‘Utility Van’). They were travelling from Rajkot to Tarapur. It is alleged that driver of the Utility Van was driving in rash, negligent and excessive speed and during such driving, he lost control over steering which resulted into capsized of the Utility Van. Deceased Ghanshayambhai traveling in Utility Van was s
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.
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 is not liable to indemnify a gratuitous passenger on board a goods vehicle unless the passenger is the owner of the good....
The liability of the insurer under a statutory policy is restricted to indemnify the insured in respect of claims made by third parties and the owner of goods or their authorized representatives who ....
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....
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.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
