1. By way of these appeals, the appellants have challenged the award dated 31.12.2005 passed by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 9, Vadodara in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 1670, 1671, 1672, 1673, 1674, 1675, 1676, 1677 of 2000 whereby the Tribunal awarded compensation alongwith interest and costs payable by the original opponents no. 1 & 2 to the original claimant. The Tribunal has exonerated the respondent no. 3-original opponent no. 3.
2. The original claimants had filed claim petition seeking compensation in respect of the vehicular accident which occurred on 26.07.2000 when the injured were travelling in a truck bearing No. GJ-7-X-9325 along with their goods. It is the case of the appellants that while the vehicle reached Vaniyadri village, the driver drove the truck in a rash and negligent manner and the vehicle turned turtle. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award.
3. Mr. Hakim, 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 appellant against the insurance company and that the Tribunal ought to have held that the driver, owner and the insurance company are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant. He submitted that the Tribunal ought to have considered that the injured were travelling in the goods with their goods. He submitted that even the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on lower side.
4. Mr. Sunil Parikh, 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 has relied upon a recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Savitri Devi And Others etc reported in 2012(4) SCALE 111 and submitted that considering that the vehicle was being used under clear violation of the terms and conditions of the policy the insurance company cannot be held liable.
5. This court has heard the parties and perused the papers on record. The contention raised by the learned advocate for the appellants 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 considered the policy placed on record and observed that the policy did not cover the risk of gratuitous passengers. As per the panchnama on record, no mention of goods in the vehicle along with the passengers is made. No documentary evidence such as consignment note, fare receipt etc is produced that the passengers were actually travelling in the truck along with their goods. The Tribunal on that basis had exonerated the insurance company from being liable. This court is in complete agreement with the reasonings adopted by the Tribunal.
5.1 In the case of National Insurance Company (Supra), the Apex Court has held that when there is a specific finding that the vehicle in question is a “Goods Carrying Vehicle”, the insurance company cannot be held liable when the vehicle was being used for for carrying passengers. The insurance policy was produced before the Tribunal. The truck 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 appellants were traveling in the said goods carrying vehicle as illegal passengers in absence of any evidence regarding owner of the goods as claimed by the appellants and therefore the Tribunal has rightly exonerated the insurance company from any claim. Moreover, the amount awarded in each appeal under each head is just and proper and does not call for any interference. Appeals are devoid of any merits and deserve to be dismissed.
6. Accordingly, appeals are dismissed.
(K.S. JHAVERI, J.) Divya//