Case Note & Summary
The appeal was filed by the United India Insurance Co. Ltd. against the judgment and award dated 25.10.2008 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) & AMACT, Haveri in MVC No.33/2006, awarding compensation of Rs.3,64,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. to the claimants, who were the legal representatives of a deceased person. The deceased was a gratuitous passenger in a goods vehicle. The insurance company contended that the policy in question was an 'Act Policy' (Ex.R-1) and not a 'Comprehensive Policy', and therefore, it was not liable to cover the risk of a gratuitous passenger. The learned counsel for the appellant relied on a decision of the Apex Court to support this argument. The court, after considering the submissions and the evidence on record, allowed the appeal and set aside the award against the insurance company, holding that the insurer is not liable to pay compensation for the death of a gratuitous passenger under an 'Act Policy'. The court directed that the compensation amount, if already deposited, be refunded to the insurance company.
Headnote
A) Motor Vehicles Act - Act Policy - Gratuitous Passenger - Liability - The issue was whether an 'Act Policy' covers the risk of a gratuitous passenger in a goods vehicle. The court, relying on the Apex Court decision, held that an 'Act Policy' does not cover such risk, and the insurer is not liable. (Paras 2-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an insurance company is liable to pay compensation for the death of a gratuitous passenger in a goods vehicle when the policy is an 'Act Policy' and not a 'Comprehensive Policy'.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment and award dated 25.10.2008 passed in MVC No.33/2006 by the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) & AMACT, Haveri is set aside insofar as it fastens liability on the Insurance Company. The compensation amount, if deposited, shall be refunded to the appellant.
Law Points
- Act Policy
- Gratuitous Passenger
- Goods Vehicle
- Third Party Risk
- Motor Vehicles Act
- 1988
- Section 147
- Section 173(1)
Case Details
2018 LawText (KAR) (02) 37
MFA NO.20607 OF 2010 (MV)
Sri. C.V. Angadi for appellant, Sri. N.P. Vivekmehta for respondents 3, 4 & 5
Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co., Ltd., Divisional Office, Enkay Complex, Keshwapur, Hubballi
1. Veerabhadrappa S/o. Chanveerappa Badiger (since deceased by L.Rs. who are already on record as Respondent Nos.3, 4 & 5), 2. Smt. Nagamma W/o. Veerabhadrappa Badiger (since deceased by L.Rs. who are already Respondent Nos.3, 4 & 5), 3. Kumari Dyamavva D/o. Veerabhadrappa Badiger, 4. Kumari Shivaleela D/o. Veerabhadrappa Badiger, 5. Kumari Kavita D/o. Veerabhadrappa Badiger, 6. Channappa Basavanneppa Karilingannavar
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeal against judgment and award in a motor accident claim case.
Remedy Sought
The appellant (Insurance Company) sought to set aside the award of compensation on the ground that the policy was an 'Act Policy' and did not cover the risk of a gratuitous passenger.
Filing Reason
The Insurance Company challenged the award of compensation to the claimants for the death of a gratuitous passenger in a goods vehicle.
Previous Decisions
The Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) & AMACT, Haveri in MVC No.33/2006 awarded compensation of Rs.3,64,000/- with 6% interest.
Issues
Whether an 'Act Policy' covers the risk of a gratuitous passenger in a goods vehicle.
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant argued that the policy (Ex.R-1) was an 'Act Policy' and not a 'Comprehensive Policy', and therefore, the insurer is not liable for the death of a gratuitous passenger. Reliance was placed on a decision of the Apex Court.
Ratio Decidendi
An 'Act Policy' under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 does not cover the risk of a gratuitous passenger in a goods vehicle. The insurer is not liable to pay compensation for the death or injury of such a passenger.
Judgment Excerpts
The learned counsel for the appellant taking me through the LCR more particularly Ex.R-1 marked in the evidence of RW-1 who was an official of the Insurance company submits that no liability could have been fastened on the company since the said Ex.R-1 is only an 'Act Policy' as contra distinguished from a 'Comprehensive policy'.
He brings to my notice a decision of the Apex Court...
Procedural History
The claimants filed MVC No.33/2006 before the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) & AMACT, Haveri, which awarded compensation of Rs.3,64,000/- with 6% interest. The Insurance Company appealed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench.
Acts & Sections
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: Section 147, Section 173(1)
