First Appeal Nos. 3222 of 2005, 2426 of 2007, 2617 and 2818 to 2820 of 2010. Case: United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Uttamben Nansingh Vasava and Ors.. Gujarat High Court
|Case Number:||First Appeal Nos. 3222 of 2005, 2426 of 2007, 2617 and 2818 to 2820 of 2010|
|Party Name:||United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Uttamben Nansingh Vasava and Ors.|
|Counsel:||For Appellant: Rajni H. Mehta, Advocate and For Respondents: Mohsin M. Hakim, Advocate|
|Judges:||N.V. Anjaria, J.|
|Issue:||Motor Vehicles Act|
|Judgement Date:||March 30, 2017|
|Court:||Gujarat High Court|
N.V. Anjaria, J.
1. The six captioned appeals involve similar facts and common issue. Therefore the appeals were heard and considered together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. They arise from different MACPs filed by the claimants which arose from the same accident.
1.1 The first captioned First Appeal No. 3222 of 2005 arises out judgment and award dated 31st March, 2005 in MACP No. 212 of 1994 decided by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (Aux.), Vadodara. First Appeal No. 2426 of 2007 is referable to MACP No. 100 of 1994 decided by the very Tribunal on 21st December 2006. First Appeal No. 2617 of 2010 arise from MACP No. 135 of 1994 decided by judgment and order dated 01st April, 2010 by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (Aux.), Vadodara, whereas First Appeal No. 2618-2620 of 2004 arise out of MACP No. 468-470 of 2004 respectively decided by common judgment and award dated 01st December, 2009 by the Tribunal at Vadodara.
2. At the outset, it may be stated that there is no challenge to the aspect of negligence as well as quantum of compensation by either side. The only question is whether the deceased could be treated as gratuitous passengers in respect of whom the insurance company has been disclaiming its liability.
3. The facts may be briefly stated. The accident took place on 04th September, 1993 in the night at about 08.00 o'clock. Applicant/s-claimant/s in each case were sitting in a Dumper being No. GBQ-7080 and that they were labourers returning after working at the site of construction. When they were reached near the sim of village Panchdevla the driver of the Dumper lost control, the Dumper which was loaded with Kapchi (gravels), turned turtle on the road. The claimants suffered grievous injuries and died. Insurance policy (Exh. 43) indicates the additional payment of premium. The insurance company alleges the breach of the conditions of the policy.
4. Heard learned advocate Mr. Rajani Mehta for the appellant-insurance company in each of the petition, learned advocate Mr. Mohsin Hakim for respondent No. 1, and learned advocate Mr. D.N. Pandya for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
4.1 Learned advocate for the appellant contended that the judgment and award of the Tribunal holding the insurance company liable and directing the insurance company to pay jointly and severally the compensation was erroneous in law in as much as, according to him, there was a breach of condition of policy and the claimants were not entitled to any compensation from the insurance company. Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that accident took place on 04th September, 1993 and in that context he relied on decision of the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v Asha Rani [(2003) 2 SCC 223]. He further relied on the decisions of the Supreme Court in National Textile Corporation Limited v Nareshkumar Badrikumar Jagad [(2011) 12 SCC 695] in particular paragraph 19 thereof as well as Rajendra...
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL