$~46 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI GO DIGIT GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. .....Appellant Through: Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Kr. Anand, Advocate.

versus VIPIN @ PAWAN & ORS. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Mr. Aakash Singh and Mr. Vikas Kumar, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

O R D E R

% 03.02.2026 CM APPL. 5218/2026 (Release of compensation amount

1. This application has been filed on behalf of respondent no.1/claimant seeking release of compensation. The total compensation of Rs. 36,01,126/- was awarded in respect of the injuries sustained by respondent no.1 due to the accident which occurred on the 11^th October 2020.

2. Notice was issued in this appeal on 22^nd December 2025, where the basic submissions of the counsels for the parties have been recorded.

3. The amount has been deposited by the insurance company as informed by Mr. Sameer Nandwani, counsel for the insurance company. The impugned award was stayed subject to further consideration.

4. The fundamental issue is whether the injured was a gratuitous passenger who was traveling in the offending vehicle the Bajaj 3-wheeler bearing registration No. DL-1LQ-7792 from Burari to Jahangirpuri, allegedly for delivery of biscuits.

5. It was alleged that due to the negligent driving of respondent no.2, the vehicle overturned and claimant suffered grievous injuries.

6. Mr. Pankaj Gupta, counsel for the claimant, states that this accident occurred in October 2020, i.e. prior to the amendment under the 2019 amendment to the Motor Vehicles Act, which came into force in 2022, and therefore, the pre-amendment situation would apply.

7. As per the pre-amended Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, there was no exclusion for gratuitous passengers, as it is post-amendment.

8. To this, Mr. Nandwani, contends that the injured was not even a gratuitous passenger, since there is no evidence placed on record to show any transaction or activity relating to delivery of goods, i.e. the purpose for which the injured was travelling in the vehicle.

9. He states that, if that is not so, then the common law cover protection given to a gratuitous passenger pre-amendment would also not support the claimant’s case.

10. Mr. Pankaj Gupta, counsel for claimant, states that they will file an affidavit undertaking that in case the issue is considered in favour of the insurance company, or without rights of recovery they will reimburse the said amount.

11. In the meantime, considering that claimant has suffered serious injuries and has not been awarded any amount so far, in order to give some reparation to the claimant an amount of Rs. 5 lacs be released by the Tribunal within 2 weeks, subject to filing of the affidavit.

12. Application is accordingly disposed of.

1. Mr. Nandwani, counsel for appellant, states that there were grounds taken in the appeal, which wrongly address a situation of a post amendment scenario, whereas the accident had occurred pre-amendment and, therefore, he sought time to amend his ground of appeal.

2. Liberty granted; he may do so within the next 4 weeks.

3. Counsels for parties will file their respective note of arguments not exceeding three pages, synopsizing their contentions along with list of citations, which they wish to rely upon, cross-referencing PDF pages of the Court File. The same will be exchanged inter se counsels at least three days prior to the next date of hearing.

4. List on 30^th March 2026, in the category of after notice matters

5. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

ANISH DAYAL, J FEBRUARY 3, 2026/RK/bp