1. By way of this appeal, the appellants have challenged the judgement and award dated 17.10.2000 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main) at Junagadh in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 115 of 1987 whereby the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 1,68,400/- alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum payable by respondent no. 1 to the original claimant. The Tribunal has exonerated the respondent no. 2.
2. The original claimant had filed claim petition seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,00,000/- in respect of the vehicular accident which occurred on 23.06.1983 when the Shri Mohanlal was travelling in a truck bearing No. GTE 8869. It is the case of the appellants that the driver drove the truck in a rash and negligent manner because of which he lost control over the vehicle and the accident happened. Shri Mohanlal died in the said accident. The appellants therefore filed claim petition under the said circumstance. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the Tribunal ought not to have exonerated the Insurance Company and ought not to have dismissed the claim of the appellants against the insurance company and that the Tribunal ought to have held that the owner cum driver and the insurance company are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimants. He further submitted that the Tribunal in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 64 of 1984 which arises out of the same accident has held the insurance company liable vide award dated 31.03.1986 and therefore the Tribunal committed an error in exonerating the insurance company in the present case.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent has supported the award of the Tribunal and submitted that the Tribunal has passed the award in accordance with law after considering the facts and circumstances of the case and therefore no interference is called for in the matter. He submitted that the award in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 64 of 1984 was passed prior to the award in the present case when the law on the subject was different.
5. This court has heard the parties and perused the papers on record. The only contention raised by the learned advocate for the appellant is that the insurance company is exonerated. As regards this the Tribunal has observed that the offending vehicle was a goods carrying vehicle and that the passengers cannot travel in the said vehicle. The Tribunal on that basis had exonerated the insurance company from being liable considering the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Smt. Mallawa vs. Oriental Insurance Company reported in 1999(1) SCC 403 which was not there in the year 1986 and therefore the view taken by the Tribunal in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 64 of 1984 is different than the one taken in the present award. This court is in complete agreement with the reasonings adopted by the Tribunal.
5.1 The vehicle in question was a good vehicle and therefore, breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy is committed. Moreover, it is also borne out that the appellant was traveling in the said goods carrying vehicle as an illegal passenger and therefore the Tribunal has rightly exonerated the insurance company from any claim. Appeal is devoid of any merits and deserves to be dismissed.
6. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.
(K.S.
JHAVERI, J.) Divya// Top