1. When the matter is called out, the learned counsel for the respondents is not present. Even on earlier occasion she was not present. Hence, the matter is taken up for hearing.
2. These appeals has been preferred against the common judgment and award dated 09.10.2001 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (AuxI), Kheda at Nadiad in M.A.C.P. No.1432/1995 and M.A.C.P. No. 1319/1995 whereby, the claim petitions were allowed in part.
3. The aforesaid claim petitions were filed in connection with the vehicular accident that took place on 03.07.1995 involving a Truck bearing registration No. GJ3T2597 in Jesangbhai had expired and Shantaben had sustained severe bodily injuries.
4. The main contention raised on behalf of the appellantInsurance Company is that the vehicle in which the deceased and injured person were travelling at the relevant point of time, was a vehicle classified as 'goods vehicle' under the Motor Vehicles Act and therefore, the appellantInsurance Company could not have been held liable to satisfy the claim in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Savitri Devi and others etc., 2012(4) SCALE 111.
5. It appears from the record that the vehicle in which the deceased / claimants were travelling at the time of accident was a 'goods vehicle'. Under the provisions of the M.V. Act, the Insurance Company of a 'goods vehicle' cannot be fastened with the liability of making payment of compensation, if any injury is caused or death takes place while travelling in such vehicle when the person concerned is not the 'employee' of the owner of such vehicle. In the present case, the deceased / claimants were travelling as gratuitous passengers. Apart from that the policy in question was not in force at the relevant time. Considering the facts of the case and in view of the principle rendered in Savitri Devi's case (supra), the appellantInsurance Company cannot be saddled with the liability of making payment of compensation and hence, it is required to be exonerated from such liability.
5. For the foregoing reasons, the appeals are allowed. The common impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is quashed and set aside only qua the extent of imposition of liability upon the appellantInsurance Company to make payment of compensation. It is, however, observed that if the amount deposited before the Tribunal is already withdrawn by the original claimants, then the same shall not be recovered from the original claimants but, shall be recovered from the owner of the offending vehicle and if the amount has not been withdrawn by the original claimants, then the same shall be refunded to the Insurance Company and the claimant shall be at liberty to recover the balance amount from the owner of the offending vehicle. Registry is directed to transmit the amount lying with this Court to the Tribunal concerned forthwith. The common impugned award stands modified to the above extent. The appeals stand disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
[K.S. JHAVERI, J.] /phalguni/