Court No. - 26
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 757 of 1996 Appellant :- Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Asstt.
Respondent :- Smt. Kusum And Another Counsel for Appellant :- K.S. Amist
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
1. Heard Sri K.S. Amist, learned counsel for appellant and perused the record. None has appeared for respondents.
2. This petition has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 30.03.1996 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Special Judge, Shahjahanpur, whereby awarding a sum of Rs.93,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum as compensation to the claimant.
3. The brief facts of the case are not narrated as it relates to question of interpretation of policy.
4. The grounds of the present case are that deceased boarded the Truck URW 557, insured with the appellant, for the purpose of travelling from his village to Shahjahanpur and he was travelling as passenger in the Truck. Thus the deceased was permitted to travel in the truck URW 557 in breach of the terms of the insurance policy and the appellant was not liable to pay any compensation and driver of the truck URW 557 was not holding valid driving licence at the time of the accident and as per terms of the insurance policy of the truck URW 557, the appellant was not liable to pay any amount of compensation.
5. Submission of learned counsel for appellant is that while going through the policy, it is clear that additional premium was accepted for non fair paying passenger, and, therefore, the submission of learned counsel for appellant cannot be accepted. The policy was not produced before the Tribunal, the Tribunal cannot be said to have committed any perversity in passing the order of compensation. It is submitted by learned counsel for appellant that the deceased was gratitude passenger and no amount or other extra amount was paid, it was later on averred before the Tribunal that they were labourers.
6. Even before the Tribunal, this aspect was never proved and as the policy was not produced before Tribunal, I have perused the policy which is shown to me by Sri Amist, learned counsel for appellant and policy shows that additional premium was taken and, therefore, now to contend that the insurance company is not liable, cannot be sustained. No other ground was urged before this Court except the ground that they were gratitude passenger and the policy did not cover them and, therefore, the insurance company is not liable.
7. I am supported in my view of the latest decision of the Apex Court in the case of Mata Ram Vs. M/s. National Insurance Company Limited, 2017 AIR (SC) 1734, where also insurer charged extra premium for 3%, it was held that they would not be absolved for liability similar is the case here.
8. The appeal is dismissed. Judgement and decree stands confirmed. Record and proceeding be sent back to concerned Trial Court. The authority concerned has already deposited the amount by the interim order, if the amount yet not be deposited, the same may be deposited with interest and amount may be disbursed to the claimants.
9. This Court is thankful to Sri K.S. Amist, learned counsel for appellant for getting very old matter disposed of.
Order Date :- 31.1.2019 Shubhankar