IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
GITA GOPI, J.
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Heirs and Legal Representatives & Ors. - Defendants
R/First Appeal Nos. 1571, 1572 of 2002 With R/Cross Objection Nos. 351, 352 of 2022
Decided On : 15-03-2024
Motor Vehicles Act - Insurance - Sections 147, 149 - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a motor accident where the deceased were traveling in a truck as part of a marriage party. The insurance company claimed that the deceased were illegal passengers and therefore not covered under the insurance policy.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the deceased were indeed traveling as illegal passengers and not as laborers, as claimed by the claimants. The court also referred to relevant judgments to support its decision.
Issues: The main issue was whether the deceased were covered under the insurance policy as laborers or were traveling as illegal passengers.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the interpretation of Sections 147 and 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act, which specify the liability of the insurer in case of death or bodily injury to any person or passenger of a public service vehicle. The court also considered the judgments of Satpal Singh and Asha Rani to determine the correct interpretation of the law.
Final Decision: The First Appeals were allowed, and the Cross Objections were rejected. The common judgment passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal was quashed and set aside. The Insurance Company was exonerated from liability, and the liability fell upon the owner of the vehicle to compensate the claimants.
JUDGMENT :
1. Both the First Appeals have been raised by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd., and against those appeals Cross Objections have been filed by the claimants as heirs of the deceased, challenging the common judgment passed on 19.02.2002 by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.) Surendranagar in M.A.C.P. Nos.737 of 1991 and 738 of 1991.
2. Learned advocate Mr. Vibhuti Nanavati for the Insurance Company referring to the facts of the case and the reasons assigned by the Tribunal, submitted that the date of accident is 02.06.1991, which is prior to the amendment in section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘M.V. Act’), which came into force vide effect from 14.11.1994, and, therefore stated that it is a case pre-amendment, and has to be dealt accordingly, in view of the observation of the Tribunal, that the deceased and others were travelling as illegal passengers in the Truck. The F.I.R. states that it was marriage party, which was travelling towards Kachchh.
2.1 Advocate Mr. Nanavati submitted that the Tribunal has relied on the judgment of New India Assurance Co. Vs. Shri Satpal Singh, reported in (2000) 1 SCC 237, while observing that the judgment of Satpal Singh (supra) was referred to larger bench. Advocate Mr. Nanavati submitted that the fact was on record that the judgment of Satpal Singh (supra) was for consideration of larger bench, and, therefore till the final decision, the Tribunal has followed the judgment of Satpal Singh (supra) and has passed the judgment.
2.2 Advocate Mr. Nanavati submits that the larger bench in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Asha Rani and Ors., reported in (2003) 2 SCC 223, has decided that the decision in Satpal Singh (supra) has not laid down the law correctly and, therefore, it was overruled.
2.3 Advocate Mr. Nanavati has also placed reliance on the judgment of this Court dated 29.03.2022 in First Appeal No.4550 of 2009 with First Appeal No.2188 of 2010 and First Appeal No.2189 of 2010, where the Division Bench of this Court was seized of the matter. Mr. Nanavati stated that the judgment of Asha Rani (supra) was taken into consideration and following the ratio, exonerated the Insurance Company making the Insurance Company entitled to recover the claim amount with interest from the claimants.
2.4 Advocate Mr. Nanavati has also referred to a judgment of National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Rattani & Ors., reported in (2009) 2 SCC 75, where it was a case of bride party travelling in Truck, allegedly transporting goods received from the bride side, where it was held that there was no gift articles in the vehicle concerned, and the victims of the accident were travelling as gratuitous passengers.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Kirtidev R. Dave for the claimants submitted that two sets of facts came on record, where it has been stated that the deceased were travelling as labourers on the truck, by Exh.43 the deposition of the claimants, which is required to be believed, and, therefore submits that the risk would be covered, as the policy covers the risk of driver, cleaner and third party and six labourers.
3.1 Advocate Mr. Dave submitted that the deceased were travelling in the Truck, as they were going from village Dadodi to Halvad for unloading earth, and Chakobhai Madabhai at Exh. 43, had stated that six labourers were travelling in the Truck, which included his wife, and during the return route the truck turned turtle, and in the accident three of them died; his wife also died at the place of accident.
4. The accident took place on 02.06.1991 at about 16:00 hours on Sara-Halvad Road. The Truck No.GTY-7111 is involved vehicle. The Tribunal has referred to the facts of the case, and has relied upon Exh.37, the FIR, to note that Truck was in full speed and had roll down the road and turned turtle. There were about fifty persons, who were travelling in a marriage party, and most of them were injured, and three died as had come below the Truck. The persons, who died were Hira W/o Chat
New India Assurance Co. Vs. Shri Satpal Singh
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Asha Rani and Ors.
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the liability of the insurer under the Motor Vehicles Act in cases of death or bodily injury to passengers, and the distincti....
Insurers are not liable for injuries to gratuitous passengers in goods vehicles under the M.V. Act, as established by the Supreme Court.
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 central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the statutory liability on the owner of the vehicle to get his vehicle insured for any passenger traveling in a goods vehi....
An Act Policy does not cover the risk of gratuitous passengers in a private car, and the principle of pay and recover is not applicable in such cases.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the insurance company is not statutorily required to cover the liability for an unauthorised passenger in a goods vehicle, based on the interp....
The court reaffirmed that insurance companies are liable to indemnify victims injured in goods vehicle accidents, even where passengers exceed policy limits, unless such violations are fundamental.
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.