Insurance companies must pay compensation even if policy conditions are breached, unless the breach fundamentally contributed to the accident.

ORDER :

J. C. Doshi, J.

1. The present First Appeal, under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 , is preferred by the appellant being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 6.6.2024 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gondal in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.89 of 2018.

2. Learned advocate for the appellant seeks complete exoneration of the appellant insurance company on the ground that the deceased was travelling as an unauthorized passenger in the tractor and trailer, whereby sitting capacity is one plus one. He would further submit that the learned Tribunal committed serious error in fastening the liability upon the insurance company at the fist instance and to recover the same from the owner in case where complete breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy is believed. Upon such submission, he prays to admit the appeal.

3. Having heard learned advocate Mr. Raval for the appellant, I may refer to findings of the learned Tribunal in para 26 to 30, which reads as under:-

“26. The learned advocates for the opponents No.2 & 4 have raised common and similar issue regarding liability to pay compensation to the applicants. They have submitted that at the time of accident, the deceased was travelling in Tractor No.GJ-12CD-3361 and Trailer No.GJ-12AV-2628 as an illegal passenger and therefore, the applicants are not entitled to get compensation as the driver and owner of Tractor No.GJ- 12CD-3361 and Trailer No.GJ-12AV-2628 have committed breach of terms and conditions of the policy and allowed the deceased to travel as an illegal passenger in the said involved vehicle. The opponents No.2 & 4 have raised another issue of driving licence. It is submitted that at the time of accident, the driver of Tractor No.GJ-12CD-3361 and Trailer No.GJ-12AV- 2628 was not holding valid and effective driving licence to drive the Tractor No.GJ-12CD-3361 and Trailer No.GJ-12AV-2628. The driver of the said vehicle was holding driving licence to drive non-transport vehicle, while involved vehicle Tractor No.GJ-12CD-3361 and Trailer No.GJ-12AV-2628 is transport vehicle and by driving such vehicle, the driver and owner have committed breach of terms and conditions of insurance policy as well as M.V.Act and therefore, the applicants are not entitled to get compensation from them.

27. In support of the case, the opponent No.2 insurance company has examined Sureshbhai Shankarji Padhiyar, RTO Inspector, Bhuj at Ex.52 wherein he has stated that the driver of Tractor No.GJ-12CD-3361 and Trailer No.GJ-12AV-2628 was holding driving licence to drive only Tractor and not trailer. If he wants to drive tractor with trailer in that case he has to obtain driving licence of TT (Tractor with Trailer). He has produced copy of extract of driving licence of driver of Tractor No.GJ- 12CD-3361 and Trailer No.GJ-12AV-2628 at Ex.54. He has been cross examined by the learned advocate for the applicants, but no material thing come out from it. The learned advocate for the opponent No.2 has issued notice to the owner of Tractor No.GJ-12CD-3361 to produce licence of driver, but the owner has not produced any driving licence of driver of Tractor No.GJ- 12CD-3361. The opponent No.2 has produced copies of notice, its A.D.Slip and acknowledgement receipt at Ex.45 to 47.

28. 28. While, the opponent No.4 insurance company has filed affidavit of Pulkit Nalinkumar Sanghavi, Deputy Manager Litigation and TP Claims at Ex.58 wherein he states that the vehicle insured with opponent No.4 is trailer to carry only goods and travelling of any person in the said trailer and to be seated on load body area is specifically prohibited by the M.V.Act and Rules. The opponent No.4 has not obtained any premium to cover the risk o