National Insurance Company Ltd. vs Anita Ahuja & Ors.
2010 Latest Caselaw 2776 Del

                * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                                     Date of Reserve: 21st April, 2010
                                                       Date of Order: 25th May, 2010
+ FAO No. 159/1990
%                                                                          25.5.2010

        National Insurance Company Ltd.                  ... Appellant
                          Through: Ms. Shanta Devi, Advocate

                Versus


        Anita Ahuja & Ors.                               ... Respondents
                                 Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate

JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the reporter or not?

3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?

JUDGMENT

The present appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company

assailing the award dated 18.5.1990 of the learned Tribunal (MACT) whereby

the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.1,15,200/- along with simple interest @ 9%

p.a. to the claimants and held that the liability of the appellant was not limited

to Rs.50,000/- only, but the appellant was liable to pay the entire

compensation amount to the claimants. It is submitted by the Counsel for the

appellant that there was no dispute/controversy regarding premium charged

by the insurance company. As per the premium charged, the liability of

appellant in terms of the Indian Motor Tariff, was only limited to Rs.50,000/-

and the Tribunal wrongly held that the liability of the Insurance Company was

unlimited.

2. This Court had considered the issue of liability of insurance

companies in Neeta Trehan & Ors. v. Gopal Krishan & Ors. FAO No.

257/1991 decided on 17.5.2010 and observed that the liability of the

Insurance Company has to be considered in view of the tariff rates as advised

by the Tariff Advisory Board.

3. In the present case there is no dispute about the tariff charged

and the only question to be decided is whether in view of the tariff charged,

the liability of the Insurance was limited or unlimited. The policy obtained by

insured in this case was a comprehensive policy insuring the property i.e. the

value of the tanker and the risk to driver, cleaner and public risk. The

following premium was charged by the insurance company as per Exh. RW-

1/B:

           Basic                            Rs.1661.00
           Plus R& S                        Rs. 137.50
           Plus Dr/Cl                       Rs. 16.00
           Plus ½ % on IEV                  Rs. 275.00
                                            ------------------------
                                            Rs.2089.50
           Less 15% NCB                     Rs. 313.50
                                            -----------------------
                                            Rs.1776.00
                                            ------------------------

4. The insurance company has placed on record Indian Motor

Tariff which prescribed the premium to be charged in case of goods carrying

vehicles falling under Class A(2) as under:

Class A (2) Goods Carrying Vehicles - General Cartage Public Carrier

Licensed Carrying Comprehensive Liability to the Act Only Capacity of the Vehicles Public Risk Liability Town Mofussil Town Mofussil Town&Mofussil

(4) Not exceeding 5080 kgs. Rs.761/-+ 1/2 % on IEV Rs.911/-+ 1/2 % on IEV Rs.87/- Rs.106/- Rs.74/-

(5 tons) (5) Exceeding 5080 Kgs. Above rate plus Rs.150/- Above rate plus Rs.150/- Rs.97/- Rs.125/- Rs.84/-

   (5 tons)                 for each additional ton   for each additional ton
                            or part thereof             or part thereof

5. The vehicle involved in this case was an oil tanker thus, the

premium charged for insurance to the risk to the vehicle was Rs.1661/- in

terms of above tariff and the premium charged for the driver and cleaner was

Rs.60/-, and Rs.137/- was the amount charged apart from these two

premiums. The tariff very clearly shows that the premium for "Act Only"

liability was Rs.84/- and not Rs.137/- which was the premium charged. A

perusal of Exh. RW-1/A (Policy) issued for the previous period, which was

renewed for the accident period would show that under „Limits of Liability‟ it

was mentioned "As required by law" and it was not mentioned "Act Only"

policy. Thus, the limits of liability of the Insurance Company were those which

were to be determined by the Tribunal as per law applicable for awarding

compensation to the dependents of the deceased. It cannot be said that the

liability of the Insurance Company was limited.

I, therefore find no force in this appeal. The appeal is hereby

dismissed.

May 25, 2010                             SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA, J.
vn