1. These appeals are directed against the judgement and award dated 17.12.2008, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Main), Anand, in M.A.C.P. Nos. 80, 81 and 82 of 2007, whereby the tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs.4,12,500/- each to the claimants of M.A.C.P. Nos, 80, 81 and 82 of 2007 respectively, with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petitions till realization.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that on 20.4.2007, some persons were travelling in a Eicher Tempo bearing registration No. GJ-4-6854 along with household articles. When they reached near village Bodaka, the driver of the said truck was driving his vehicle rashly and negligently, therefore, he lost control over his vehicle and the said Truck turned turtle. As a result of which Babubhai Bahlabhai Makwan, Jagdishbhai Shankarbhai Jadav and Pravinbhai Mafatbhai Rathod and others received serious injuries and due to which they died. Therefore, the legal heirs of the deceased Babubhai Bahlabhai Makwan, Jagdishbhai Shankarbhai Jadav and Pravinbhai Mafatbhai Rathod filed claim petitions being M.A.C.P. No. 80, 81, and 82 of 2007 before the Tribunal for compensation.
2.1. The tribunal after hearing learned advocates for the parties and after perusing the record, decided the claim petition and passed the award as stated hereinabove, against which the present appeals are preferred by the appellant- Insurance Company.
3. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in holding the Insurance Company liable for making payment of compensation. The Tribunal ought to have exonerated the Insurance Company from making payment of compensation, as the vehicle in which the deceased were travelling was a 'goods vehicle' and deceased were not travelling in the said vehicle in the capacity of the owners of the goods. therefore, the Insurance Company 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 vs. Parvathbeni and Anr., 2009 (3) GLH 377.
4. I have heard learned advocate appearing for the appellant and perused the materials on record. It is not in dispute that the vehicle in question in which the deceased were travelling was a 'goods vehicle'. The insurance policy specifies that the vehicle insured was a goods carriage vehicle and restricted carrying of any passenger in the vehicle except its employees. The deceased persons were neither travelling in the capacity of its employees nor were they travelling as the owners of goods. Under the circumstances, the appellant- Insurance Company could not be held liable in view of the principle laid down in National Insurance Company Limited (Supra). Hence, the appeals of the Insurance Company deserve to be allowed.
5. For the foregoing reasons, the appeals are allowed. The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is quashed only qua the extent of imposition of liability on 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 claimants, the same shall not be recovered from the original claimant and the Insurance Company shall be at liberty to recover the same from the owner of the 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 and cost, if any. The appeals stand disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
[K. S. JHAVERI, J.] pawan