SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1984 Supreme(P&H) 493

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
D.S.Tewatia and Surinder Singh JJ.
Ramesh Kumar
Versus
National Insurance Company Limited
First Appeal from the Order No. 538 of 1984,
Decided On : AUGUST 10, 1984

The statutory liability of the insurer extends to Rs.1,50,000 for the death of or injury to a third party with effect from October 1, 1982, as per the amended provision of Sections 95(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.

Headnote:

Motor Vehicles Act - Insurance Coverage - Interpretation of Section 95(2) - The court held that the statutory liability of the insurer extends to Rs.1,50,000 for the death of or injury to a third party with effect from October 1, 1982, as per the amended provision of Sections 95(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The liability of the insurance company was extended to cover the entire amount awarded by the Tribunal.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant's truck met with an accident resulting in the death of Joginder Singh. The Tribunal awarded compensation, and the appellant claimed that the liability of the insurance company extended to Rs.1,50,000 as per the amended provision of Sections 95(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the statutory liability of the insurer extended to Rs.1,50,000 for the death of or injury to a third party with effect from October 1, 1982, and that the liability of the insurance company covered the entire amount awarded by the Tribunal. The appeal was allowed accordingly.

Issues: Interpretation of Section 95(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and the extent of insurance coverage for the death of or injury to a third party.

Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the amended provision of Sections 95(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, and held that the statutory liability of the insurer extended to Rs.1,50,000 for the death of or injury to a third party with effect from October 1, 1982.

Final Decision: The award of the Tribunal was modified, and the appeal was allowed to the extent that the liability of the insurance company covered the entire amount awarded by the Tribunal. No order as to costs.

Judgment

1. The appellants truck met with an accident on December 10, 1982. As a result thereof, one Joginder Singh died. The Tribunal awarded as compensation a sum of Rs.67,200 to the claimants with interest at the rate of 10 per cent per annum. Out of the said amount, the Tribunal ordered that the insurance company (respondent No, 1 herein) shall pay Rs.50,000. The appellant, owner of the offending vehicle in this appeal, claims that the liability of the insurance company, as per amended provision of Sections 95 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 , which reads as under, extended to Rs.1,50,000 for the death of, or injury to, a third party with effect from October 1, 1982.

"95 (2) (a ). Where the vehicle is a goods vehicle, a limit of one lakh and fifty thousand rupees in all, including the liabilities, if any, arising under the Workmens Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923), in respect of the death of, or bodily injury to, employees (other than the driver) not exceeding six in number, being carried in the vehicle. . . "

2. Admittedly, the policy of insurance covering the offending vehicle was issued on October 28, 1982, by which date admittedly the amendment to Sections 95 raising the aforesaid statutory amount of coverage from Rs.50,000 to Rs.1,50,000 had become operative.

3. Section 94 envisages compulsory insurance against third party risk to the extent provided by Sections 95. In view of the aforesaid two provisions, after October 1, 1982, the statutory liability of the insurer extends to Rs.1,50,000. That means, whenever a policy of insurance is issued by the insurance company, it has statutorily to cover risk to the insured up to that amount. Such being the position, the liability of the respondent insurance company, in the present case, would extend to the entire amount awarded by the Tribunal. Therefore, the award of the Tribunal is modified accordingly and the appeal is allowed to the extent mentioned above. No order as to costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top