Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.
1. All these appeals raise common question of law as to whether Insurance Companies, the appellants herein, are liable only to the extent of statutory liability fixed under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short the Act of 1939) or their liability is unlimited.
2. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the appellants that in the Schedule of premium under the Heading 'liability to public risk', it was indicated to be Rs. 240/-. The stand in essence, therefore, is that when any extra premium is not paid for any enhanced liability, the statutorily liability fixed for Rs. 50,000/- or Rs. 1,5Q,000/- was maximum that could have been awarded, and nothing beyond it. Reliance is placed on National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Keshav Bahadur and Ors. : AIR2004SC1581 , New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. C.M. Jaya and Ors. : [2002]1SCR298 , National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nathilal and Ors. : AIR1999SC623 ], New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. N.M. Annakutty and Ors. 1997 (2) ACJ 1121, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Daddi Suryakanthanam and Ors. 1999 (1) TAC 763 (AP) and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sreenivasan, 1999 C2) TAC 113 (Ker.).
3. Per contra, learned Counsel for the respondents took us to the India Motor Tariffs, Schedule of Premiums applicable w.e.f. 1.6.1985, according to which the Covers available are as under:-
I. Own Damage Cover - Loss of damage by accidental external means or malicious acts, fire external explosion; lightning, self-ignition, burglary, housebreaking or theft, riot and strike, flood inundation and earthquake (fire and damage).
II. Liability to the public risks or third party cover - Indemnity to the insured against liability for claims by the public in respect of accidental personal injury or damage to property caused by or arising out of the use of the insured vehicle.
I. III. 'Act Only' liability cover - Indemnity to the insured against legal liability as under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, for claims by the public in respect of accidental personal injury or damage to property caused by or arising out of the use of he insured vehicle. Subject to the General Exceptions of the policy.
4. Page 15 relates to the Goods Carrying Vehicles, which reads as under:-- 'Class 'A-(2)' Goods Carrying Vehicles - General Carriage:--
___________________________________________________________________________Licensed Carrying Own Damage Liability to the Act onlyCapacity of the Vehicle Public Risks Liability___________________________________________________________________________Not exceeding 1016 Kgs. Rs. 340 + 1.05% Rs. 120 Rs. 100(1 Ton) on I.E.V.Not exceeding 3048 Kgs. Rs. 550 + 1.10% Rs. 240 Rs. 200(3 Tons) on I.E.V.Not exceeding 5080 Kgs. Rs. 850 + 1.10% Rs. 240 Rs. 200(5 Tons)Exceeding 5080 Kgs. Rs. 850 + Rs. Rs. 240 Rs. 20(5 Tons) 200 for each1016 Kgs. (1 Tonor part thereof)+ 1.10% onI.E.V.___________________________________________________________________________N.B.: 1. Section 1 of all Comprehensive Policies must be subject to a compulsory excess of:--
i) in respect of 3 Wheeled Vehicles with Licensed Carrying Capacity not exceeding 508 Kgs. Rs. 200/-
ii) in respect of all other Vehicles Rs. 500/-
2. See Note to Endorsement No. 26 Special Exclusion (Commercial Vehicles Policies only) on Sheet 177 of the Tariff.
3. In respect of Vehicles fitted with Fibre Glass Tank, an additional rate of 2% on the I.E.V. Of the Fibre Glass Tank only should be charged.
4. Minimum values for the computation of premium in respect of vehicles will be as follows irrespective of any lower value proposed for insurance.
Licensed Carrying Capacity
Three Wheeled Vehicle with carrying capacity not exceeding 508 Kgs. (1/2 Ton) - Rs. 5,0007-
Not exceeding 1016 Kgs. (3 Tons) - Rs. 15,0007-Not exceeding 3048 Kgs. (5 Tons) - Rs. 20,0007-Not exceeding 5080 Kgs. (5 Tons) - Rs. 30,0007-Exceeding 5080 Kgs. (5 Tons) - Rs. 40,000.7-
5. The following discounts may be allowed from the premium:
(a) 0.10% on I.E.V. If Earthquake etc. perils are excluded
(b) 0.15% on I.E.V. If Flood etc. perils are excluded
(c) 0.15% on I.E.V. If Riot, Strike etc. perils are excluded.
5. Page 17 relates to the Passenger Carrying Vehicles (Excluding Passenger Risks) which indicates thus;-
Class 'B-(1)' Passenger Carrying Vehicles (Excluding Passenger Risks)
(a) Buses/(including Tourist Buses)
(b) Hotel/School Omnibuses
(c) Airline Buses.
Subject to endorsement No. 26 and compulsory Excess of Rs. 500A except in the case of Liability to the Public Risk,
__________________________________________________________________________Maximum Licensed Own Damage Liability to Act onlyPassenger Carrying the Public LiabilityCapacity Risks__________________________________________________________________________Not exceeding 18 Seats Rs. 280 + 1.10% Rs. 240 Rs. 200on I.E.V.' 35 Seats Rs. 360 + 1.10% Rs. 240 Rs. 200on I.E.V.' 60 Seats Rs. 440 + 1.10% Rs. 240 Rs. 200on I.E.V.Exceeding 60 Seats Rs. 545 + 1.80% Rs. 240 Rs. 200on I.E.V.__________________________________________________________________________N.B.: 1. Minimum values for premium computation will be as follows irrespective of any lower values declared for Insurance.
Maximum Licensed Passenger Carrying Capacity:
Not exceeding 18 Seats - Rs. 15,000/-' 36 ' - Rs. 25,000/-' 60 ' - Rs. 40,000/-Exceeding 60 ' - Rs. 50,000/-N.B.: The following discounts may be allowed :
(a) 0.10% on I.E.V. If Earthquake etc. perils are excluded
(b) u. l 5% on I.E.V. If Flood etc. perils are excluded
(c) 0.15% on I.E.V. If Rio't, Strike etc. perils are excluded.
Class B (2) : Passenger Carrying Vehicle (Taxis)
(a) Taxis or Private Car Type Vehicles for Hire or Reward,
(b) Private Type Taxis let out on Private Hire direct by owner with or without meters and driven by the owner or an employee of the owner.
(c) Private Car Type vehicles let out on Private Hire and driven by the Hirer or any driver with his permission
(d) Private Car Type vehicles owned by Hotels and hired by them to their Guests.
6. Learned Counsel for the respondents placed reliance on National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Laxmi and Ors. and canvassed that if insurance company has charged additional premium, its liability towards third party risk is unlimited.
7. In National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Laxmi (supra), the Tribunal awarded sum of Rs. 1,04,000/- as compensation to the claimants and the insurance company was held liable to indemnify the owner of the vehicle for the entire sum under the policy. The insurance company appealed before the High Court for limiting its liability to Rs. 50,000/-, the statutory liability fixed under 1939 Act. After the High Court dis-missed the appeal, the matter was taken to Supreme Court from where the matter was remanded to the Tribunal with the direction to hold an inquiry as regards the liability of the insurance company. After framing additional issue and considering the material the Tribunal found that premium for the 'Act only policy' was Rs. 200/- and the premium charged from the vehicle owner was Rs. 240/- which was captioned 'liability to public risk Act only' which under the insurance jargon considered as 'Third party risk policy' by charging higher than the 'Act only policy' and on that premise, it came to the conclusion that the insurance company has charged additional premium for public risk and its liability towards 'Third party risk' was unlimited and the insurance company was liable for the entire claim. The award of the Tribunal was assailed in appeal before the Single Bench of the High Court which was dismissed. The Division Bench consid-ered the terms of policy and held as under:-
Therefore, in our opinion, under policy the appellant specifically undertook unlimited liability to indemnify the insured towards the Third-party by not excluding the liability if the insured in respect of claims arising out of death or bodily injury caused to the third party. Therefore the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and learned Single Judge were right in their conclusion.
8. In Keshav Bahadur's case (supra), the Apex Court indicated thus:
In case of insurer-appellant not taking any higher liability by accepting higher premium, the liability is neither unlimited nor higher than the statutory liability fixed under Section 95(2) of the Act. Even if a vehicle is the subject matter of comprehensive insurance and a higher premium is paid on that score, limits of the liability with regard to third party risk does not become unlimited or higher beyond the statutory liability fixed. For this purpose, a specific agreement has to be arrived at between the insured and the insurer and separate premium has to be paid in respect of additional amount of liability undertaken by the insurer in that regard.
9. The principle, that is settled is that merely charging of higher premium or even taking a comprehensive policy does not necessarily cover the third party risk to the unlimited extent unless terms of the policy so provide for.
10. In the matters before us, the learned Single Judge observed that since a premium of Rs, 240/- has been charged by the Insurance Company to cover the liability to public risk which is higher than the 'Act only', the premium of Rs. 200/-. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered in the cases of Smt. Dropdi Devi and Ors. v. Inder Kumar and Anr., 1996 (3) WLC 356, and New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Pushpa Kakkar and Ors., II (1992) ACC 191, the liability of the Insurance Company would be unlimited and the Insurance Company was liable to meet out all third party liability claims and the Insurance company cannot avoid the liability to pay the awarded amount to the claimants.
11. In view of the ratio indicated in National Insurance Co. v. Laxmi (supra), We find no infirmity in the impugned orders of the learned Single Judge. For these reasons, these appeals being devoid of merit stand dismissed. No costs.