1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhavnagar in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.149 of 1990, whereby the Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,55,000/- to original claimant with running interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date of the application till its realization and in default to deposit the amount within 4 months, the interest at the rate of 15% be paid.
2. The facts of the case is that on 14.11.1989 at about 4.00 a.m., one tanker No.GRP-4702, loaded with light diesel oil was being unloaded in the oil depot and at that time, original opponent No.1 left the running tanker and went out and in the meanwhile due to some electrical defect in the tanker, the said tanker got the fire and exploded with heavy blast. In the said accident the original applicant and another got injured and other persons were succumbed to death. Therefore, the original claimant filed claim petition being Motor Accident Claims Petition No.149 of 1990 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhavnagar for compensation.
3. The Tribunal, after hearing learned advocate for the parties and after considering the evidence produced on record, decided the claim petition and passed the award as stated herein above, against which present appeal is preferred.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the Tribunal has erred in assessing the disability of the original claimant as the disability was not proved. He has further submitted that the Tribunal also erred in allowing the compensation under the other heads.
5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the Tribunal has erred in limiting the liability of the Insurance Company at Rs.6,000/-. He has further contended that the the Tribunal has not considered agricultural income of the appellant. He has further contended that the Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards the personal injury, shock and suffering of the appellant and loss to the business.
7. Learned advocate for the respondent has placed the reliance on the decision of Apex Court in case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Jugal Kishore and Others reported in 1988 ACJ 270 and on the decision of Apex Court in case of Bomanji Rustomji Ginwala Vs. Ibrahim Vali Master and Others reported in 1982 GLH 520 and submitted that the liability of the Insurance Company was restricted to the tune of Rs.6,000/- only.
8. Considering the facts of the case, it would be relevant to refer to Section 147(2)(b) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which reads as under:-
“(b) in respect of damage to any property of a third party, a limit of rupees six thousand: Provided that any policy of insurance issued with any limited liability and in force, immediately before the commencement of this Act, shall continue to be effective for a period of four months after such commencement or till the date of expiry of such policy whichever is earlier.”
9. In view of the aforesaid provision of the Motor Vehicles Act and since the insurance policy covers limited liability in respect of damage to the property of third party, the Tribunal was justified in limiting the liability of the respondent-Insurance Company to the tune of Rs.6,000/-. I am in agreement with the reasonings given by the Tribunal, while passing the award. In that view of the matter, no interference is called for. Hence, present appeal is dismissed.
..mitesh..
[K.S.JHAVERI, J.]