1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 21.09.1999 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Jamnagar in M.A.C.P. No.382/1994 whereby the claim petition was partly allowed and respondent no.1-original claimant was awarded total compensation of Rs.1,89,200/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application till its realization.
2. The facts in brief are that on 15.02.1994 respondent no.1 herein and one Samat Lakhubhai were travelling in a Rickshaw bearing registration No. GJ-10-T- 7678 driven by respondent no.3. When they reached near Khamnath Bridge on the Porbandar – Khambhalia road, another Rickshaw (Chakda) bearing registration No. GTP 8703, driven by respondent no.2 and owned by respondent no.4, dashed the Rickshaw in which respondent no.1 was travelling. In the said accident, both respondent no.1 and said Samat Lakhubhai sustained severe bodily injuries. Subsequently, Samat Lakhubhai succumbed to the injuries. Therefore, respondent no.1 filed claim petition before the Tribunal, which came to be partly allowed by way of the impugned award. Being aggrieved by the impugned award passed in M.A.C.P. No.382/1994, the appellant- Insurance Company has preferred the present appeal.
3. It has been mainly contended on behalf of the appellant that the vehicle in which respondent no.1 was travelling was a 'goods vehicle' and therefore, it could not be saddled with any liability in view of the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited v. Rattani & Ors., (2009) 2 SCC 75.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to dispute the aforesaid proposition of law.
5. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. It is not in dispute that the vehicle in question in which respondent no.1 was travelling was a 'goods vehicle'. Under the circumstances, the appellant-Insurance Company could not be held liable to pay compensation in view of the principle laid down in Rattani's case (supra). Hence, the appeal preferred by the appellant- Insurance Company deserves to be allowed.
6. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is allowed. The impugned common judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is quashed and set aside only qua the extent of imposition of liability upon the appellant- Insurance Company to make payment of compensation. It is, however, observed that if the amount deposited before the Tribunal is already withdrawn by the original claimant, the same shall not be recovered from the original claimant and the appellant-Insurance Company shall be at liberty to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. But, if the amount has not been withdrawn by the original claimant, the same shall be refunded to the Insurance Company along with interest @ 3% per annum. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
[K. S. JHAVERI, J.] Pravin/*