Judgment:
M.F. Saldanha, J.
1. The short point that is involved in this appeal but a point of considerable importance is a question as to whether the appellant insurance company can be held liable for the claim that has been preferred on behalf of a deceased police constable. The incident in question took place at about 2.45 a.m. in the early hours of 15.9.1985. The lorry No. MED 4692 was approaching Nelamangala Town and two police constables boarded that lorry. Some time later, there was a violent collision between this truck and another stationary truck parked on the highway without any lights. As a result of this collision, both the police constables died and two claims were preferred. We are not concerned with the other claim except to a very limited extent in so far as the Tribunal did award an amount of Rs. 60.000 in that case as compensation and the respondents' learned advocate submitted that the insurance company has not appealed against that award. The appellant's learned advocate states that he is not aware as to whether this position is correct and that he, therefore, does not accept that statement. To my mind, it does not make much difference because even though the respondents' learned advocate vehemently submitted that if the insurance company has accepted the liability in respect of the other police constable who died in the same incident then it would be estopped from disputing the liability in this case; that position is not altogether correct because the two cases were heard separately and the findings are also dissimilar but on the question of liability, there is some justification in the argument that the insurance company cannot be permitted to adopt different standards in respect of similarly situated persons, particularly when the deaths occurred in the same incident. That, however, is not the end of the matter.
2. The appellant's learned advocate submitted that the law on the point has now been settled by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Dundamma : ILR1991KAR2045 , wherein the Full Bench has categorically held that the liability of the insurance company cannot be invoked in those cases where a passenger is found travelling in a goods vehicle. He, therefore, submitted that the deceased had boarded a goods vehicle and howsoever unfortunate it may be, the insurance company cannot be held liable because the deceased was a passenger in a goods vehicle. The respondents' learned advocate has disputed this position on facts because he submits that even the Full Bench judgment has made certain exceptions such as the case of an owner who is accompanying the goods carried in the vehicle and he submits that the bar is not absolute. In the present case what he points out is not that the deceased was not a lay person but that he was a member of the police force and that this would make some difference. He has taken me through the record and demonstrated that the deceased was in uniform, that he even had the lathi which the police normally carry with them when they are on duty and that there is no dispute about the fact that the deceased was not on a private visit but that he was stationed at that particular place on duty. On the basis of this document the learned advocate submits that the court ought not to hold that he was a mere passenger in the vehicle and if this is the position, then the order of the Tribunal awarding compensation must be upheld. I do concede that the law on the point is quite conclusive and that the appellant's learned advocate is right when he points out that a passenger in a goods vehicle would be disqualified from claiming compensation. The present case is a very very unusual one insofar as it has been demonstrated that the deceased was in uniform and that he was on duty at that time. There is some suggestion to the effect that his duty had just got over and that the reason why he boarded the vehicle was because he was making his way home after finishing his duty. This evidence is not, however, conclusive insofar as the deceased was not available to indicate the reasons why he boarded the vehicle and we do not have any other positive evidence to disprove the fact that he could have boarded the vehicle for a specific purpose. I am conscious of the fact that it may be a question of propounding a reasonable hypothecation but the court needs to take into consideration the possibility that there could have been several very plausible reasons why the deceased boarded the vehicle in question. The more important of them being that it might have been in connection with an enquiry or investigation or it could have also been if for any reason the deceased felt that the vehicle should be taken to the closest police station. This is virtually a grey area insofar as there is no conclusive evidence on record to indicate definitely as to why the deceased was travelling in the vehicle in question. Though there is an equal possibility that he was a mere passenger, there is a greater probability that he was not and having regard to the state of the record and the fact that the deceased had been on duty and was in uniform, I would prefer to accept the latter position. If that be the case, then the deceased had every reason to be travelling in the vehicle as a member of the law enforcement machinery and if the accident has taken place, he would certainly be entitled to compensation because he would not come within the excluded category. This being the position, I see no reason for this Court to interfere with the award that has been made by the Tribunal. The award is accordingly confirmed though for different reasons. The appellant is directed to deposit the balance amount with the Tribunal within an outer limit of twelve weeks from today.
3. The Tribunal has indicated in the award that the respondent No. 1, wife will be entitled to receive two of the amounts exclusively. These two amounts along with the interest shall be paid over to the respondent No. 1, wife. The balance of the amount shall be invested under four separate heads. The amount shall be divided equally into four parts, the first of them being invested as a fixed deposit for a period of five years renewable every five years for five such periods in the name of the respondent No. 1, wife, with instructions to the bank to pay the interest to the respondent No. 1 and on the expiry of the said period to repay to her the principal without any further court orders. The Tribunal shall ensure that the investment is done in a nationalised or commercial bank situated reasonably close to the place where the respondent No. 1 is residing. As far as the balance three amounts are concerned, they shall be similarly invested in the joint names of each of the minor children and the mother for a similar period renewable until 5 years after the minor in question has attained majority. The interest shall be payable quarterly to the mother for the benefit of the children and it is directed that in respect of payment of interest and the repayment of principal that the bank be informed that no further court orders will be necessary and that on the expiry of the period in question the repayment shall automatically be made.
4. The appeal accordingly fails and stands disposed of. No order as to costs.
5. Before parting with this judgment, it is necessary for this Court to take very serious note of what has been pointed out by the learned Counsel who had argued this matter. They were unanimous about one very disturbing aspect of the matter, viz., the fact that a truck had been left in a stationary condition on the highway and that too without any lights. The incident took place late at night and the ill-fated vehicle in which the police constables were travelling had come a long distance and the driver was obviously tired. The principal cause of the collision was because a vehicle approached from the opposite side with 4 bright headlights on full beam which were so dazzling that they completely blinded the driver of the oncoming vehicle who lost sight of the stationary truck on his side of the road and went headlong into it. It was under identical circumstances that the bus driver in Andhra Pradesh was completely blinded by the lights of an oncoming truck and landed the bus in the river recently killing 26 persons.
6. This court has recently issued specific directions to the Transport Department and the State Government to set up highway patrols for purposes of enforcing safety regulations on the highways. The State Government and in particular, the Minister of Transport require to be complimented for having indicated that steps have already been taken to implement this proposal and even to ensure that certain first-aid centres are set up on the highways. This is a step in the right direction, but more importantly, what needs to be done is that drivers of all vehicles need to be very clearly informed of the serious danger that is caused due to dazzling headlights. In this case, the two constables and the driver of the vehicle lost their lives and incidents like this are only on the increase with the use of extremely bright light producing halogen bulbs. In this background, it is essential that necessary preventive action be taken in order to ensure that the lights do not cause such incidents in future. Having regard to this position, the following directions are issued:
(a) That the office of the Transport Commissioner shall make it known all over the State through proper media releases that the traffic police will take stringent action against the driver of any vehicle which fails to dip the lights while approaching an oncoming vehicle. Also, where additional lights are used, these shall be positioned in such a way that they do not blind the oncoming traffic and that necessary steps will be taken to ensure this and they shall be so positioned when operative.
(b) As far as the cities are concerned, starting with the city of Bangalore, where there have been serious complaints with regard to the dangers caused by dazzling headlights, it shall be brought to the notice of all motorists that the use of the main beam shall be banned within the city limits. In the interest of safety all vehicle drivers shall make note that any breach of this regulation will result in an on the spot penalty.
7. The traffic and control authorities have pointed out to the court that even in those cases, particularly in the cities where vehicle numbers have been noted, that it is extremely laborious and time consuming to trace out the owners/drivers as the records are not computerised. It is shocking that in this day and age, these two vital wings of the Government should be handicapped in this fashion. Obviously this has been over-looked and the State Government shall, therefore, ensure with immediate effect that the requisite computers are provided to both the departments so that the police are able to immediately trace out all the details of the offending vehicle. In view of the importance of this matter, the authorities shall endeavour to take this corrective step immediately and shall complete it not later than 1.1.1998.