Allowed

New India Assurance Co.Ltd. v. Shantuben Shilabhia

Gujarat HC6 Feb 2012CRA/477/1996

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a motor accident claim, the High Court allowed an appeal and quashed the Tribunal's award imposing liability on the insurer. The court followed a Supreme Court decision holding that insurers are not liable for unauthorized passengers in goods vehicles due to policy breach.

What did the court decide?

The impugned judgment and award imposing liability on the appellant-Insurance Company is quashed. The award is set aside to the extent of liability imposed on the insurer.

New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs Shantuben Shilabhia — Motor Accident Claims | Gujarat HC (2012)

¶1

FA/1011/1996

¶2

1/5

¶3

JUDGMENT

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶5

FIRST APPEAL No. 1011 of 1996

¶6

With
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION No. 476 of 1996
With
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION No. 477 of 1996
To

¶7

CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION No. 483 of 1996

¶8

For Approval and Signature:

¶9

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI

¶10

=========================================================

¶11

1^{Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed} to see the judgment ?

¶12

2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

¶13

3^{Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy} of the judgment ?

¶14

Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the 4 constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?

¶15

5^{Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge} ?

¶16

=========================================================

¶17

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD - Appellant(s)

¶18

Versus

¶19

TEJUBEN NANUBHAI & 6 - Defendant(s)

¶20

=========================================================

¶21

Appearance :

¶22

MR HM BHAGATfor Appellant(s) : 1,MS LILU K BHAYA for Appellant(s) :
1,

¶23

None for Defendant(s) : 1,

¶24

MR DM DEVNANI for Defendant(s) : 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3,1.2.5
NOTICE SERVED for Defendant(s) : 1.2.4, 7,
MR SUNIL K SHAH for Defendant(s) : 6,

¶25

=========================================================

¶26

CORAM :HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI

¶27

Date : 06/02/2012

¶28

FA/1011/1996

¶29

2/5

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶32

1.0 The above appeal as well as Revision Applications are directed against the judgement and award dated 15.11.1995 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Bhavnagar in Motor Accident Claim Petitions No. 181 of 1995 and judgement and award dated 02.11.1995 in Motor Accident Claim Petitions No. 318 of 1992 to 325 of 1992. All the matters arose from one accident and therefore, the they are disposed of by this common judgement .

¶33

2.0 On 24.02.1992 when one Nanubhai Dansinghbhai along with the claimants were travelling along with their goods in Tempo No. G.D.C 4501, the said tempo dashed with Tree at about 10.30 a.m.by rash and negligent driving by the driver on Palitana Talaja Highway. Nanubhai Dansinghbhai among other in the said Tempo died. Hence, the legal heirs of the deceased as well as claimants have preferred aforesaid claim petitions before the Tribunal wherein the aforesaid award came to be passed.

¶34

3.0 Learned advocate appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company mainly contended that the vehicle involved in the accident was goods vehicle and therefore the insurer would not be liable to pay compensation for the death of the deceased as well as injuries received by the claimants who were travelling in a goods vehicle and met with

¶35

FA/1011/1996

¶36

3/5

¶37

JUDGMENT

¶38

death or bodily injuries on account of an accident. He further submitted that the accident occurred in the year 1992. In support of his contention he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd versus Asha Rani and other reported in

¶39

(2003) 2 Supreme Court Cases 223.

¶40

4.0 He further submitted that the deceased as well as claimants were travelling as passengers in the goods vehicle and therefore there is breach of policy and therefore, the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation.

¶41

5.0 Learned advocate for the respondent supported the judgement and award of the learned Tribunal.

¶42

6.0 Heard learned advocate for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. The question arising in the present appeals is whether the insurer is liable to pay compensation to the heirs of the deceased as well as the claimants who were travelling as passengers in goods vehicle and thereby there is breach of policy. The deceased as well as the claimants were travelling in the Goods Tempo and thereby the they were unauthorized travellers on the goods vehicle. Therefore there was breach of terms of the policy. This view is supported by the decision in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd versus Asha Rani

¶43

FA/1011/1996

¶44

4/5

¶45

JUDGMENT

¶46

and other (supra) reported in (2003) 2 Supreme Court Cases 223.

¶47

6.1 In view of the above the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation to the claimants since the vehicle involved was goods vehicle and deceased and claimants were travelling as unauthorized passengers in a goods vehicle.

¶48

7.0 For the foregoing reasons, the appeals are allowed. The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is quashed qua the extent of imposition of liability on the appellant-Insurance Company to make payment of compensation. It is, however, observed that if the amount deposited before the Tribunal is already withdrawn by the original claimants, the same shall not be recovered from the original claimants and the Insurance Company shall be at liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. If the amount is not withdrawn by the original claimants, it will be open to them to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. No order as to costs. Cross-objection if any also stands disposed of.

¶49

(K.S.JHAVERI, J.)

¶50

FA/1011/1996

¶51

5/5

¶52

JUDGMENT

¶53

niru*

New India Assurance Co.Ltd. v. Shantuben Shilabhia

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

New India Assurance Co.Ltd. v. Shantuben Shilabhia

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sister of Charity of St.Anni Navjivan Leprosy Hospital Vs Arifbhai B Kapadia Decd.Thro' Heirs Dilsadben Arifbhai & 5

Juvansing Bhimsinh Jadeja Vs Jayaben S Mistry

Juvansing Bhimsinh Jadeja Vs Nanduben Jodhabhai Koli

Bhimjibhai Ratnabhai Ramani Vs Nagjibhai Ratnabhai Ramani

New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs Meghjibhai Jadadvbhai

New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs Lilliben Jadavbhai