Point of Law: Claimant had not been travelling in vehicle as owner of goods, he shall not be covered by policy of insurance.

JUDGMENT :

A. BADHARUDEEN, J.

1. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. who is the 2nd respondent in O.P. (M.V.) No. 84/2009 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, Kasaragod, is the appellant herein. The respondents are the original petitioner as well as the original 1st respondent before the Tribunal.

2. The Insurance Company disputed liability and sought exoneration from liability raising contention that the 1st respondent/injured was a gratuitous passenger in a goods vehicle viz. Goods Autorickshaw bearing registration no. KL-14G-3792. Though the appellant sought for exoneration, the Tribunal did not allow the same.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.

4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the Tribunal negatived the contention raised by the Insurance Company to grant full exoneration without rationale though the 1st respondent/original petitioner was travelling in the goods autorickshaw involved in the accident after sharing the seat of the driver where driver alone was permitted to travel. According to the learned counsel the finding of the Tribunal giving the 1st respondent/petitioner the status of a person accompanying the goods carried therein is unsustainable. The learned counsel for the appellant placed decision reported in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Suresh K.K. and Another, 2008 (12) SCC 657 : 2008 KHC 4602 in support of this contention. In this decision it was held that if the claimant had not been travelling in the vehicle as owner of the goods, he shall not be covered by the policy of the insurance. In any view of the matter in a three wheeler goods carriage, the driver could not have allowed anybody else to share his seat. No other person whether as a passenger or as a owner of the vehicle is supposed to share the seat of the driver. Violation of the condition of the contract of insurance, therefore, is approved.

5. To be on the facts of this case, in order to answer the challenge raised by the learned counsel for the appellant, on 23.01.2008 at about 14:30 hours, while the injured was travelling in a Bajaj Goods Autorickshaw bearing registration no. KL-14G-3792 along with construction goods to the work site by sitting near the driver of the vehicle and transporting the construction goods, he met with an accident when the said Autorickshaw suddenly turned by its driver. The injured being the original petitioner/1st respondent herein claimed Rs. 1,50,000/- as compensation.

6. 1st respondent, the owner-cum-driver was set ex-parte by the Tribunal.

7. The 2nd respondent-insurer/appellant filed a written statement disputing the negligence and denying liability raising specific contention that the injured/1st respondent was a gratuitous passenger in a goods vehicle. But the Tribual disowned the contention and found liability on the part of the insurer.

8. Now, the learned counsel for the appellant canvassed exoneration of liability fastened on the appellant Insurance Company.

9. In order to resolve the question, reference to Sections 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act is necessary and the same is extracted here under:

“147. Requirements of policies and limits of liability:

(1) In order to comply the requirements of this Chapter, a policy of insurance must be a policy which:

(a) is issued by a person who is an authorized insurer.

(b) insures the person or classes of persons specified in the policy to extent specified in sub-section (2):

(i) against any liability which may be incurred by him in respect of the death of or bodily injury to any person, including owner of the goods or his authorized representative carried in the vehicle or damage to any property of a third party caused by or arising out of the use of the vehicle in a public place.

(ii) against the death of or bodily injury to any passenger of a public service vehicle caused by or arising out of the use of the vehicle in a public place:

Provided that a policy shall not be required:

(i) to cover liability in respect of the de