Insurance liability under a 'Liability only Policy' does not extend to cover claims for injuries or deaths of gratuitous passengers, including pillion riders.

JUDGMENT :

NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA, J.

1. This appeal is filed by the appellant-Insurance Company under Section 173 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988, against the Award and decree passed by the court of the M.A.C.T-Cum-Principal District and Sessions Judge, Adilabad (hereinafter referred to ‘learned Tribunal’) in M.V.O.P.No.56 of 2017, dated 27.08.2019, wherein, learned Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- to the claimants/respondents herein.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed before the learned Tribunal.

3. The brief facts of the case are that claimant filed M.V.O.P.No.56 of 2017 under Section 163-A) of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 seeking compensation on account of death of the deceased i.e., Aegolapu @ Pusala Mahesh Goud. On 27.03.2014, the deceased was proceeding on motorcycle bearing No.AP-15-AQ-6533 from Chintaguda (K) village to Indaram as pillion rider along with his rider and when they reached near Shri Shri Nagar Reliance Petrol Pump, Chunnambattiwada, Mancherial, the rider of said motorcycle drove it in a rash and negligent manner with high speed, due to which the deceased fell down on the road and sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. The rider of the said motorcycle also died while undergoing treatment. The Police, Mancherial, registered a case in Crime No.160/2014 under Sections 304-A, 338 of IPC against the rider of motorcycle bearing No.AP-15-AQ-6533.

4. Due to the said accident, the claimants suffered mental agony, financial problems and future source of income of the deceased, as claimants were dependent upon deceased. The claimants claimed an amount of Rs.6,00,000/- as compensation for the death of the deceased under various heads.

5. The contention of the claimants before the Tribunal, as on the date of accident the deceased was aged about 25 years and used to earn Rs.12,000/- per month as a lorry driver which he used to contribute the same for the welfare of the family. Due to the sudden death of the deceased, the claimants No.1 lost her husband and claimant No.2 who is father of the deceased lost their son and both the claimants lost their conjugal happiness and lost deceased’s company and there is no other person to take care of the claimants and the petitioners lost their dependency.

6. Before the learned Tribunal, respondent Nos.1 - Owner of motorcycle bearing No.AP-15AQ-6533 remained ex-parte. Respondent No.2 – United India Insurance Company Limited, filed counter-affidavit, denying all the averments made in the claim petition, including the manner in which the accident took place, age, avocation and income of the deceased and contended that rider of the motorcycle is not having valid and effective license at the time of the accident and the compensation claimed is excessive and prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

7. Basing on the pleadings and averments made by both the counsels, the learned Tribunal framed the following issues which reads as under:

1. Whether the deceased Aegolapu @ Pusala Mahesh Goud, died in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 27.03.2014 at about 07.45 p.m., near Shri Nagar Reliance Petrol Pump, Chunnambattiwada, Mancherial, involving the motorcycle bearing No.AP-15-AQ-6533?

2. Whether there was any insurance coverage for the motorcycle bearing No.AP-15-AQ-6533 and if so, does the policy cover the risk of deceased and if so, was there any breach of policy condition alleged by the respondents?

3. What were the age, avocation and the earnings of deceased?

4. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation, if so, to what amount and against who