(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decreetal order dated 29.08.2005 made in MCOP.No.851 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal District Judge), Dindigul.
Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 29.08.2005 made in MCOP.No.850 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Principal District Judge), Dindigul.)
Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 29.08.2005 made in MCOP.No.361 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Principal District Judge), Dindigul.)
Common Judgment
1. CRP(MD)No.1821 of 2007 and CMA(MD)Nos.1646 and 500 of 2007 are filed against the common order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Principal District Judge), Dindigul, in MCOP.Nos.851 and 850 of 2002 and 361 of 2001. The accident occurred on 19.11.1998 around 16.45 hours on Chittoor-Honnavara NH road near Karjeevanahalli Gate, Sira Taluk, Tumkur District, Karnataka State. It is the case where the Ambassador Car dashed with the parked Lorry on the road causing death of two persons and injury to one person. The victim and the legal representatives of the deceased filed applications seeking compensation, and the Tribunal, considering the facts and circumstances of the cases, awarded compensation.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant insurance company contended that the the Ambassador Car, in which, the victims were travelling was insured with the appellant and ''Act only policy'' was taken by the owner of the vehicle and the same will not cover the passengers, who were travelling in a private Car and therefore, the Tribunal ought to have exonerated the appellant insurance company from the liability. Accordingly, the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation for the victims, who were travelling in a private car, in view of the fact that ''Act only policy'' was in force. The fact regarding ''Act only policy'' was admitted and proved by the insurance company before the Tribunal and further, the fact that the victims in the accident were travelling in the Ambassador Car, was also not disputed by the parties before the Tribunal. In view of these admitted facts before the Tribunal, the appellant insurance company is to be exonerated.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents/claimants opposed the contentions of the appellant, by stating that it is a case where the respondents/claimants are entitled for compensation and contended that the Ambassador Car dashed with the Lorry, which was parked on the road and therefore, the Tribunal ought to have fixed the liability at least on the 4th respondent/Oriental Insurance Company, Theni, with whom, the Lorry was insured.
4. This contention cannot be raised as far as the appellant National Insurance Company is concerned, because, the Ambassador Car was holding the policy of ''Act only'' and therefore, the National Insurance Company is to be exonerated in totality. Such being the situation, this Court is of the view that the fixation of liability on the part of the appellant insurance company by the Tribunal, is in violation of Section 147(1)(ii) of the Motor Vehicles Act, which states that in order to comply with the requirements of this Chapter, a policy of insurance must be a policy against the death of or bodily injury to any passenger of a public service vehicle caused by or arising out of the use of the vehicle in a public place.
5. Hence, the award passed by the Tribunal in all the cases are set aside. The appellant insurance company is permitted to withdraw the entire award amount with interest in all the cases, by filing necessary applications before the Tribunal.
In the result, CRP(MD)No.1821 of 2007 and CMA(MD)Nos.1646 and 500 of 2007 are allowed. No costs. Consequently, MP(MD)Nos.1, 3 and 1 of 2007 and 1 of 2009 are closed.