1. The appellant-Insurance Company has preferred these appeals against the common judgment and award dated 11.01.2002 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Auxi.) Surendranagar,(for short, “the Tribunal”) in M.A.C.P. Nos. 583 and 584 of 1991, whereby, the tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs.70,000/- to the claimant of M.A.C.P. No.583 of 1991, Rs.75,000/- to the claimants of M.A.C.P. No. 584 of 1991, respectively, with interest at the rate of 09% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization. 3. The facts in brief are that on 26.10.1990, one Sushilaben Dahyabhai Patel along with her husband Dahyabhai Vallabhai Patel were travelling in a Matador bearing registration No. GJ-6-T-5375. When they reached near Limbdi Police Station. 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 the said accident the husband of Sushilaben was expired and Sushilaben sustained grievous injuries. Therefore, they filed claim petitions being M.A.C.P. Nos. 583, 584 of 1991, before the Tribunal for compensation.
3.1. The Tribunal after hearing learned advocates for both the parties and after perusing the record decided the claim petitions and passed the award as stated hereinabove, against which the present appeals are filed by the appellant- Insurance Company.
4. The appellant-Insurance Company has preferred the present appeals mainly contending that the vehicle in which the deceased were 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.
5. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. It is not in dispute that the vehicle in question in which the labourers were travelling was a 'goods vehicle'. 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.
6. 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 It is, however, observed that if the amount deposited before the Tribunal is already withdrawn by the original claimants, the same shall not be recovered from the original claimants and the Insurance Company shall be at liberty to recover the same from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 claimants, the same shall be refunded to the Insurance Company. The appeals stand disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
[K. S. JHAVERI, J.]
pawan