Act Policy for private car covers bodily injury to 'any person' including passengers; insurer fully liable without recovery from owner absent willful breach, per broad policy interpretation.

JUDGMENT :

Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, J.

This judgment shall dispose of two appeals, one bearing No. FAO No.312 of 2015 filed by the appellant-National Insurance Company and another bearing No. FAO No.273 of 2015 filed by the appellant-Nausahad Ahmed. Both these appeals arise out of a common award dated 01.04.2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P., whereby the claim petition preferred by injured Vipan Kumar was allowed and he was held entitled for compensation of Rs.3,14,659/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition till realization. The liability to pay the awarded amount was upon the owner, namely Nausahad Ahmed. However, keeping in view the fact that the vehicle was insured with the appellant–Insurance Company and third-party risk was covered, it was ordered that the appellant–Insurance Company would first satisfy the award and thereafter, the liberty was granted to recover the amount from the owner, i.e., appellant–Nausahad Ahmed. The parties in the appeals shall be hereinafter referred to as they were in the claim petition.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the key facts for adjudicating the claim in both the appeals are that the claimant– Vipan Kumar had sustained multiple injuries in a motor accident occurred on 15.01.2002 at about 2:00 p.m. near Malwa Cotton Mills, Patlion, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P. At the relevant time, the claimant was travelling in a Maruti Car bearing No.UGX-4001, which was being driven by one Shri Rakesh Kumar Sharma, who also sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same.

3. At the time of accident, the claimant was 38 years old and working as a Sales Representative with M/s Sharma Enterprises at Village Khodonwala, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur and was earning a monthly salary of Rs. 5,000/-.

4. An FIR was registered. The claimant remained under treatment and thus claimed compensation of Rs.7,00,000/- along with interest from the respondents jointly and severally.

5. Appellant-Nausahad Ahmed contested the claim petition and admitted ownership of the car but pleaded that the accident occurred due to sudden mechanical defect. He further pleaded that the vehicle at the relevant time was insured with the Insurance Company.

6. The appellant–Insurance Company contested the petition and raised preliminary objections, inter alia, that the petition was bad for misjoinder of necessary parties as appellant–Nausahad Ahmed was not the owner of the car at the time of the accident. It was also pleaded that late Sh. Rakesh Kumar Sharma was the owner and driver at the time of the accident and his legal representatives had not been impleaded. It was further pleaded that the petition was filed in collusion with owner-Nausahad Ahmed; and that the driver did not hold a valid driving licence. The income of the claimant was also stated to be exaggerated.

7. The claimant filed a rejoinder denying the averments made in the replies.

8. The Tribunal on the basis of the pleadings, framed the following issues:

“1) Whether petitioner Vipan Kumar sustained grievous injuries in a motor accident caused by rash and negligent driving of a Maruti Car (No. UGX-4001) by its driver (who also died) near Malwa Cotton Mills, Patlion in Pa