Back
2015 Supreme(P&H) 1865
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Inderjit Singh, J.
HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd. - Appellant
Vs.
Rahila & Others - Respondents
FAO No. 7886 of 2014 (O&M)
Decided On : 12-03-2015
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Sanjeev Goyal
For the Respondents: Amit Jain
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the insurance company is not liable for compensation in a motor vehicular accident if the deceased was not in compliance with the intended use of the vehicle.
Headnote:
Motor Vehicles Act - Compensation - Section 163-A - [Issue 1, Issue 2, Issue 3, Issue 4] - The court discussed the applicability of insurance liability in a motor vehicular accident resulting in death. The court referred to various judgments to establish that the insurance company is not liable for the claim as the deceased was sitting on the mudguard of the tractor, which is meant only for the driver.
Fact of the Case:
The claimants filed a petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation for the death of Asruddin in a motor vehicular accident. The appellant insurance company challenged the award of compensation by the Tribunal, arguing that the deceased was sitting on the mudguard of the tractor, making the insurance company not liable to pay compensation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the insurance company is not liable for the claim on account of the death of Asruddin, who was sitting on the mudguard of the tractor, as the tractor is meant only for one person, the driver.
Issues: The issues framed by the Tribunal included the occurrence of the accident, entitlement to compensation, validity of the driver's license, and violation of insurance policy terms and conditions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on various judgments to establish that the insurance company is not liable for the claim as the deceased was sitting on the mudguard of the tractor, which is meant only for the driver.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned award passed by the Tribunal in favor of the appellant insurance company.
Inderjit Singh, J.
Appellant HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Ltd. has filed this appeal against Rahila, Baby Sinar, Master Hamja and Master Bilal Mohd. (minors), Harun, Samina, Gafur and Mufeed respondents challenging the impugned award dated 02.05.2014 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mewat (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal').
2. The brief facts of the case are that Rahila, widow of Sh.Asruddin, Baby Sinar, Master Hamja, Master Bilal Mohd. (minor children), Harun and Samina filed claim petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against Gafur, driver of offending vehicle bearing registration No.RJ-05RB-0301, Mufeed, owner of offender vehicle and HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Ltd., insurer of offending vehicle, for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs. 15 lacs along with interest at the rate of 24% per annum from the date of institution of petition till realization on account of death of Asruddin in a motor vehicular accident.
3. It is stated in the claim petition that on 15.11.2012 at about 3.00 P.M., Asruddin was coming back after doing labour work on tractor No.RJ-05RB-0301 owned by Mufeed, which was driven by Gafur. When the tractor reached near village Rithat, Gafur overturned the tractor by driving the same rashly and negligently, as a result of which, Asruddin fell down under the tractor. He was shifted to General Hospital, Mandikhera for treatment but due to serious injuries, he was referred to Delhi, however, he succumbed to injuries on his way to the hospital. It has been alleged that the accident took place solely due to rash and negligent driving of tractor in question driven by Gafur.
4. Respondent No. 1 and 2 (in claim petition) in their written statement, denied the accident. It is also alleged that answering respondents have been falsely implicated in this case. It is also stated that if the Court considers that the accident had taken place due to negligence of respondent No. 1 Gafur, then insurance company is liable to pay the compensation to the petitioners as the alleged vehicle was fully insured with the insurance company. Respondent No. 3 (present appellant) filed its written statement and stated that deceased was a gratuitous passenger in the alleged vehicle. False FIR has been registered against the driver of the vehicle after delay of 15 days. It is further stated that the vehicle in question has been falsely implicated in this case.
Learned Tribunal framed following issues:-
"1. Whether the accident resulting into death of Asruddin son of Harun took place on 15.11.2012 in the jurisdiction of PS Nagina, due to the accident arising out of use of vehicle No.RJ-05RB-0301 by its driver/respondent No. 1? OPP.
2. If issue No. 1 is proved, whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation. If so, to what amount and from whom? OPP.
3. Whether respondent No. 1 was not holding a valid and effective driving licence on the date of accident? OPR-3.
4. Whether respondent No. 2 has violated the terms and conditions of the insurance police, as alleged. If so, to what effect? OPR-3.
5. Relief."
5. Claimants examined PW-1 Harun, PW-2 Islam and PW-3 Jube and closed the evidence. On the other hand, respondents in claim petition had not led any evidence and evidence was closed by order.
6. The Tribunal after appreciating the evidence, passed impugned award dated 02.05.2014 and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 4,85,100/- to be paid by the respondents jointly and severally along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of petition till its realization.
7. Aggrieved from this award, appellant insurance company filed the present appeal.
8. Notice of motion was issued and learned counsel for respondents appeared and contested the appeal.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that as the deceased Asruddin was sitting on the Mudguard of the tractor, therefore, Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation, as it is the violation of terms and cond
