Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Karambir – Appellant
Versus
Suresh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. establishment of responsibility for the accident. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. challenge to the tribunal's compensation decision. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. analysis of evidence against the claim of gratuitous passenger. (Para 8 , 9 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. determination of insurance liability under current law. (Para 11 , 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT :
Sudeepti Sharma J.
The present appeal has been filed by the appellants-Karambir (driver) and Ashok (owner) of the offending vehicle against the Award dated 03.05.2007 passed in the claim petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rohtak (for short, 'the Tribunal'), wherein the claimants were held entitled for compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,94,500/- alongwith interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum on account of death of Tilak Raj, in a Motor Vehicular Accident, occurred on 28.06.2005 and liability was fastened upon the appellants to pay the compensation.
FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE
2. The brief facts of the case as mentioned in the claim petition are that on 28.06.2005, one Ajmer was travelling on his bicycle in the area of village Rohana, Police Station, Kharkhoda. His bicycle was knocked down by a TATA-407 vehicle bearing registration
The insurer is liable for compensatory claims for authorized representatives of goods transported, contradicting prior assumptions of passenger liability.
Insurer of goods carriage not liable for gratuitous passengers' death/injuries; no 'pay and recover' direction by Tribunal, as lacks Supreme Court's Article 142 power.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation for unauthorized passengers in goods vehicles, based on the interpretation of relevant....
Point of Law : Insurance Company was directed to pay compensation even for gratuitous passenger considering circumstances of this case under the “Doctrine of Pay and Recover” from the driver and owne....
Insurers are not liable for gratuitous passengers in goods vehicles under the old Motor Vehicles Act provisions, as clarified by the Supreme Court.
Gratuitous passengers in goods vehicles are not entitled to insurance coverage under the Motor Vehicles Act, affecting liability in compensation claims.
Gratuitous passengers in goods vehicles are not covered by standard insurance policies unless additional premiums are paid, rendering previous rulings on liability inapplicable.
Insurers are not liable for injuries to gratuitous passengers in goods vehicles under the M.V. Act, as established by the Supreme Court.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
