Back
2009 Supreme(MP) 221
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (GWALIOR BENCH)
S.K. Gangele, J.
National Insurance Company Ltd.
Vs.
Bank of India and others
Misc. Appeal No. 71 of 2009
Decided On: 17.02.2009
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: S.N. Gajendragadkar
For Respondents/Defendant:D.K. Gupta for Respondent No. 1, Raju Sharma for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and Smt. Meena Singhal for Respondent Nos. 4 to 9
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of the liability of the Insurance Company in a motor accident claim, considering the nature of the accident, the insurance policy, and relevant legal provisions.
Headnote:
Insurance Company - Motor Accident Claims - Indian Penal Code, sections 279, 337 and 304-A - 2004 ACJ 2094, 2006 ACJ 636, 2007(3) TAC 20 (SC), 2007(1) MPLJ 315 : 2007 ACJ 10, 2008 (1) TAC 6 (SC), 2008(2) MPLJ 8 : ILR (2008) M. P. 282 - The court discussed the liability of the Insurance Company in a motor accident claim, considering the nature of the accident, the insurance policy, and the legal provisions referenced in the case. The court analyzed the evidence, including the F.I.R. and witness testimonies, and referred to relevant judgments to determine the liability of the Insurance Company for compensation.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased was traveling in a tractor when it became turtle due to rash and negligent driving, resulting in serious injuries and death. The Insurance Company denied liability, stating that the tractor was used for commercial purposes, contrary to the insurance policy.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the deceased was a third party and held the Insurance Company liable for compensation based on the accident and relevant legal provisions.
Issues: The issues revolved around the nature of the accident, the use of the tractor, and the liability of the Insurance Company for compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the evidence, including the F.I.R. and witness testimonies, and referenced relevant legal provisions and judgments to determine the liability of the Insurance Company.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal filed by the Insurance Company, holding that the Insurance Company is not liable for payment of compensation, and modified the award passed by the Claims Tribunal accordingly.
S.K. Gangele, J.
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant-Insurance Company, against the award dated 13-10-2008, passed by the Xth Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Gwalior, in Claim Case No. 33/2007.
2. On 15-2-2007, it is said that deceased Rambaran had been travelling in a tractor bearing Registration No. MP 07 HA-4654. Due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the tractor, it became turtle and the trolley attached to the tractor also turned down, in the aforesaid accident Rambaran received serious injuries and died on the spot. The report of the accident was lodged at the Police Station Bijauli, District Gwalior and an offence under sections 279, 337 and 304-A of Indian Penal Code, vide Crime No. 665/05, was registered against the driver of the tractor. Thereafter, the claimants filed claim application before the Claims Tribunal for compensation of Rs. 18,30,000/- .
3. The claimants before the Claims Tribunal pleaded that on 15-2-2007, deceased had been returning to his village Bilhati from Morar on his bicycle and at village Hasanpura Public Road, he was dashed by a tractor bearing Registration No. MP 07 HA-4654. It has further been stated that due to the aforesaid accident the trolley attached to the tractor turned down over the deceased and deceased Rambaran died.
4. The Insurance Company in its written statement, filed before the Claims Tribunal, denied the nature of accident and stated that due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the tractor, the tractor became turtle and the trolley attached to the tractor also turned down. The tractor was insured for agriculture purpose and it was used for commercial purpose, which was contrary to the Insurance Policy, hence, there is no question of liability of the Insurance Company.
5. The Claims Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the tractor. The tractor was insured by the Insurance Company at the relevant time but it was used for commercial purpose. The deceased was third party because the accident occurred when deceased was hit by the tractor. The Tribunal fixed the liability for payment of compensation on the Insurance Company and awarded total compensation of Rs. 3,35,900/- .
6. Learned Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company has submitted that the Claims Tribunal has committed an error of law in fixing the liability on the Insurance Company. Because the accident occurred when the deceased was travelling in the trolley attached to the tractor, hence, the Insurance Company is not liable for payment of compensation. In support of his contentions, Learned Counsel relied on the following judgments:--
i) 2004 ACJ 2094, National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Challa Bharathamma and others; ii) 2006 ACJ 636, Jayraj and another vs. Kaluram and another; iii) 2007(3) TAC 20 (SC), Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Brij Mohan and others; iv) 2007(1) MPLJ 315 : 2007 ACJ 10, Mithlesh and others vs. Brijendra Singh Baghel and others; (v) 2008 (1) TAC 6 (SC), United India Insurance Company Limited vs. Serjerao and others; and vi) 2008(2) MPLJ 8 : ILR (2008) M. P. 282, Arun Kumar Patel and anr. vs. Smt. Terasi Saket and ors.)
7. Contrary to this, Learned Counsel for the respondents have submitted that the award passed by the Claims Tribunal is as per law. The deceased was a third party. He was dashed by the aforesaid tractor when he was going on a bicycle. In support of their contentions, Learned Counsel submitted the following judgments:
i) 2004 ACJ 721, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Nanjappan and others, ii) 2004 ACJ 1903, Pramod Kumar Agrawal and another vs. Mushtari Begum and others, and iii) 2007 ACJ 1928, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Premlata Shukla and others.
8. Before the Claims Tribunal in support of the case, the wife of the deceased Savita examined herself. She stated that on 15-2-2007, her husband had been coming from Morar on a bicycle to house and he was dashed by a tractor. Another witnes
