Appeal against lower Tribunal's decision denying insurance company liability. The court affirmed that the deceased was an unauthorised passenger in a goods vehicle carrying 13 people, placing the matter outside the insurance policy coverage under Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1994.
No costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU
C.M.A. No.3203 of 2003
DATE: 19.07.2012
Between:
Boraga Nageswara Rao and another
…… Appellants And
Dadala Surya Kumar and 2 others
…..Respondents
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA
GOVINDARAJULU
C.M.A. No.3203 of 2003
JUDGMENT :
The appellants herein are claimants before the lower Tribunal and they are dependants on the deceased who died in road accident which took place on 03.04.1997. There is no dispute about the factum of accident. At that time, the deceased Boraga Somalamma was travelling in the accident vehicle bearing No.ADF 4977 which is a goods vehicle. The lower Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- to the claimants for death of the deceased.
But the lower Tribunal awarded the said compensation as
against driver and owner of the accident vehicle and did not make the insurance company liable for the compensation on the ground that the deceased was unauthorised passenger in the goods vehicle. There is no dispute about the accident vehicle having insurance coverage with New India Assurance Company Limited. As per evidence of R.W-1 and Ex.B-1 insurance policy and Ex.B-2 permit of the lorry, the lorry is entitled to carry three persons viz., driver, cleaner and owner of goods being carried in the lorry or his authorised representative. At the time of accident, there were 13 persons travelling in the lorry. Ex.A-1 F.I.R. reads that out of 13 persons in the lorry, 10 persons are named as coolies engaged for unloading the goods in the lorry. Out of those 10 named persons in F.I.R, name of the deceased does not find place. Therefore, the lower Tribunal came to the conclusion that the deceased was unauthorised passenger in the goods vehicle. Having regard to decisions of the Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company
Limited V. Asha Ran i[1] and Oriental Insurance Company Limited V. Devireddy Konda Reddy[2] , the lower Tribunal held that the insurance company cannot be mulcted with liability to pay compensation for death of the
deceased who is unauthorised passenger in the lorry/goods vehicle as such persons are outside the coverage of insurance policy and also in view of Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1994. When there is documentary proof as to the persons who are engaged for unloading brick load from the lorry and when name of the deceased does not find place in that list of coolies, the lower Tribunal rightly came to the conclusion that the deceased was unauthorised passenger in the accident vehicle. I do not find any valid reasons to come to a different conclusion in this appeal. The lower Court rightly did not award compensation as against the insurance company in this case.
2) In the result, the appeal is dismissed. No costs.
_______________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J
July 19, 2012 ksh
[1] 2002(8) Supreme 594
[2] 2003(1) Supreme 732
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the insurance company is liable for compensation when the deceased was an unauthorised passenger in a goods vehicle.
Whether the lower Tribunal correctly held that the deceased was an unauthorised passenger based on the absence of their name in the list of coolies engaged for unloading.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
New India Assurance Company Limited v. Asha RanFollowed¶17
New India Assurance Company Limited V. Asha Ran 2002(8) Supreme 594
Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Devireddy Konda ReddyFollowed¶17
Oriental Insurance Company Limited V. Devireddy Konda Reddy 2003(1) Supreme 732
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Boraga Nageswara Rao
another
Dadala Surya Kumar
Samudrala Govindarajulu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
