United India Insurance Company Ltd., Lko. Thru… — Motor Accident Claims | Allahabad HC (2025)

United India Insurance Company Ltd., Lko. Thru… — Motor Accident Claims | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal admitted and notice ordered to respondents through the District Judge concerned; recovery proceedings stayed against the appellant provided it deposits half of the entire awarded amount with interest within eight weeks before the Tribunal, out of which 50% is to be released; statutory deposit of Rs.25,000/- remitted to the Tribunal and adjusted towards the directed deposit; appellant exempted from penal interest for the present; case listed on 27/01/2026.

Issue for consideration

Whether a passenger travelling in a goods vehicle in an unauthorised manner who paid rent to the driver can be treated as a gratuitous passenger or a third party, bearing on the liability of the appellant insurance company under the impugned award.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, J. — First Appeal From Order No. 500 of 2025 under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 preferred by United India Insurance Company Ltd. against the judgment and award dated 11/08/2025 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sultanpur in Motor Accident Claim Case No.48 of 2016, whereby the claim petition under Section 66 Motor Vehicles Act was decreed for ₹3,06,300/- with 6% per annum simple interest against the insurer. Appellant contended that the deceased, travelling in a goods vehicle and having paid rent to the driver, cannot be treated as a gratuitous passenger or third party. At the admission stage the Court admitted the appeal, issued notice to the respondents through the District Judge concerned, and granted interim relief staying recovery against the appellant conditional on deposit of half of the awarded amount with interest within eight weeks before the Tribunal (50% thereof releasable); the statutory deposit of Rs.25,000/- was directed to be remitted to the Tribunal and adjusted, and the appellant was exempted from penal interest for the present. Matter listed on 27/01/2026. No merits decided.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 500 of 2025

United India Insurance Company Ltd., Lko. Thru. Branch Manager

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

Harichran Dayal Srivastava, Died During Proceeding At Tribunal And Others

Proceeding At Tribunal And Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Appellant(s) : Maneesh Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) :

Court No. - 19

HON'BLE RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record.

Instant FAFO, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 11/08/2025, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sultanpur, in Motor Accident Claim Case No.48 of 2016 (Haricharan Dayal Srivastava and other versus Bahadur Sut Jeet Singh and others), whereby the claim petition filed under Section 66 Motor Vehicles Act has been decreed for ₹3,06,300/along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum simple interest and the appellant was directed to pay the compensation amount to the claim petitioners.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned court below has failed to consider this fact in the right perspective that the deceased, Dinesh Chandra Srivastava, who was traveling in a goods vehicle along with its driver, Khalashi and some other passengers. They also paid rent to the driver. The accident occurred on the said date i.e. 25.05.2015 at

FAFO No. 500 of 2025

2

4:00 AM, when the driver felt bouts of sleep and the vehicle collided with an electric pole, the deceased, Dinesh Chandra Srivastava, sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot. A passenger, who was traveling in a goods vehicle in an unauthorized manner and paid rent, can not be treated as a gratuitous passenger or third party. Nevertheless, the Tribunal has rejected the claim against the appellant insurance company.

The matter requires consideration.

Admit.

Issue notice to the respondents, which shall be served on them through District Judge concerned.

List this case on 27/01/2026.

It is informed that the respondent no. 4 is residing in UK, therefore, service of process be effected on him through respondent no.3, who is his mother.

The recovery proceedings shall remain stayed against the appellant; provided that the appellant deposits half of the entire amount awarded along with interest within eight weeks before the Tribunal, Out of which 50% will be released. The statutory deposit of Rs.25,000/- before this Court, shall be remitted to the Tribunal immediately, which shall be adjusted towards the amount which is directed to be deposited by the appellant. The appellant is exempted from penal interest right now as directed in the impugned judgment.

November 17, 2025

KR

(Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.)

Digitally signed by :- RABINDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench