DIVISION BENCH

29. At this stage, it would be expedient to notice the conspectus of law emerged from the judgments of Honble the Supreme Court and High Courts cited at the Bar.

i. The act of insurance is not a private legislation and bargain between the employer and employees but a public Act based in favour of third person to compel the owner of the vehicle to reimburse the sufferer, provided protection to the third person i.e. the road users as is obvious and appears from the whole purview and intention of the legislation was the only remedy for breach of statutory duty, should not be only fine rather on the construction of statute. It can be inferred that the person injured by breach of the statute has a right to recover damages from the one committing it.

ii. Insurer can undertake to cover the risk beyond that provided by the Statute or the limits by entering into a special contract.

iii. The Statute provides defence to the insurer;

iv. No insurer is entitled to avoid his liability or benefits of the judgment to any person other than the one provided by the statute i.e. Section 149 of the Act.

v. Where the insured has done everything within his power, it cannot be said