1. The present appeal is directed against the judgement and award dated 19.06.2001 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main) Rajkot in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 675 of 1995 whereby the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 2,15,000/- alongwith interest payable by the original opponents jointly and severally.
2. The original claimants had filed claim petition seeking compensation in respect of the vehicular accident which occurred on 19.02.1995 when the deceased Keshubhai Vasani was travelling in a tractor trailor driven by the original opponent no. 1 in a rash and negligent manner. The original opponent no. 1 lost control over the tractor as a result of which the tractor turned turtle. Shri Keshubhai sustained serious injuries and succumbed to those injuries. The legal heirs and representatives of the deceased therefore filed claim petition under the said circumstance. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award.
3. Mr. Sunil Parikh, learned advocate appearing for Mr. Rajni Mehta for the appellant has contended that the Tribunal ought to have exonerated the Insurance Company and ought to have dismissed the claim of the claimants against the insurance company and that the Tribunal ought to have held that the driver and owner of the tractor trailer are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimants. He submitted that the Tribunal failed to appreciate that the Insurance company is not liable to pay any compensation to the claimant as the vehicle was being used in violation of the terms and conditions of the policy. He submitted that more than 50 persons were being carried in the tractor trailer and that the deceased was not an agricultural labourer as held by the Tribunal.
4. Though served none appears for the claimants.
5. Mr. Bhatt, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 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.
6. 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 ought to have been exonerated from the claim. The insurance policy which was produced before the Tribunal is placed on record. It is clear from the records that the vehicle in question is meant for agricultural purpose and not for passenger use. The deposition of the claimant, widow of the deceased itself brings out the fact that the deceased was a member of a marriage party of nearly 50 people being carried in the vehicle. The deposition is further corroborated with the FIR wherein also it was clearly mentioned that et tractor trailer was hired for the purposes of going for a marriage and in the process the vehicle turned turtle causing injuries. The tractor trailer is a goods vehicle wherein no passenger is permitted to be carried, more particularly for hire or reward and therefore the insurance company cannot be held liable for the payment of compensation. The Tribunal has committed an error in not exonerating the insurance company from the claim.
7. Accordingly, appeal is allowed. The award of the Tribunal is quashed and set aside qua liability of the insurance company-present appellant. It is made clear that the original claimants shall be entitled to recover the amount which was liable to be paid by the insurance company from the owner of the tractor trailer. The amount deposited, if any, by the insurance company by way of Fixed Deposit shall be refunded. However, if the said amount has been withdrawn by the original claimants, it will be open to the insurance company to recover the same from the owner of the tractor trailer. The award of the Tribunal is modified accordingly.
(K.S. JHAVERI, J.) Divya//