Karnataka High Court
Shantamma W/O Vishwanath vs Nagamma W/O Devindra And Anr on 3 January, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:87
MFA.No.200563 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200563 OF 2017 (MV-INJ)
BETWEEN:
SHANTAMMA W/O VISHWANATH
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD & BUSINESS,
R/O. H.NO.3-228 DHANNURA VILLAGE,
TQ: BHALKI, DIST: BIDAR-585101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. BABU H. METAGUDDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. NAGAMMA W/O DEVINDRA
AGE: 47 YEARS,
OCC: LABOUR / COOLIE AND HOUSE HOLD,
R/O: RAJESHWAR, TQ: HUMNABAD,
DIST: BIDAR, NOW AT H.NO.19-5-118
Digitally signed RAMCHADRA NAGAR, NAUBAD, BIDAR-584101.
by
KHAJAAMEEN
L MALAGHAN 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER
Location: High ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
Court of
Karnataka BRANCH OFFICE SHOP NO.3
KAMSHETTY COMPLEX,
NEAR BUS STAND UDGIR ROAD
BIDAR-584101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SUDARSHAN M., ADV. FOR R2
V/O DATED 26.10.2023 NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:87
MFA.No.200563 of 2017
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MV ACT,
PRAYING TO A) CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN
M.V.C.NO.308/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDL. MACT AT BIDAR, B) ALLOW THIS
APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
29.12.2016 PASSED IN M.V.C.NO.308/2015 BY THE
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDL. MACT AT BIDAR
AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 INSURANCE COMPANY
TO PAY THE COMPENSATION TO THE CLAIMANT.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the
Tribunal in MVC.No.308/2016 dated 29.12.2016, the
appellant - owner of the offending vehicle is before this
Court questioning the liability.
02. The claim petition is filed seeking compensation
of an amount of Rs.8,30,000/- for the injuries sustained
by the claimant in the accident.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:87
03. It is the case of the claimant that on
06.12.2012, the claimant along with another was waiting
for a bus, by that time a Maxicab came and the claimant
had boarded same. Because of the rash and negligent
driving of the driver of the Maxicab, the claimant had
sustained the injuries. The Tribunal had granted
compensation of an amount of Rs.1,12,000/-. The Tribunal
had held that the insurance company is not liable to pay
compensation and the owner of the offending vehicle is
alone liable to pay the compensation, by applying the ratio
as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of New
India Assurance Company Ltd., vs. Asha Rani and
othe1rs1, by interpreting the Section 147 of the M.V. Act,
held that the term "any person" does not include the
passengers, as it is a Act Policy, it is held that owner alone
is liable to pay the compensation, but not the insurance
company.
(2003) 2 SCC 223
NC: 2024:KHC-K:87
04. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant
submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Asha Rani and others, has observed that Section 147 of
the M.V. Act, prescribes the compulsory coverage against
the death or bodily injuries to any passenger of public
service vehicle. It is submitted that observation made in
the Asha Rani and others case, referred supra it is
rightly interpreted by the Tribunal and in view of the said
findings, the passengers are covered and the insurance
company is liable to pay the compensation.
05. The learned counsel appearing for the insurance
company submits that the policy is an Act Policy, the
insurance company is exempted from the liability to pay
the compensation. As per the Act Policy, the inmates of
the offending vehicle are not covered.
06. Having heard the learned counsel on either
side, perused the entire material on record.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:87
07. In this case, the claimant was traveling in a
Maxicab. Section 2 (35) of the M.V. Act, 1939 defines the
"public service vehicle", means any motor vehicle used or
adapted to be used for the carriage of passengers for hire
or reward, and includes a maxi cab, a motor cab, contract
carriage, and stage carriage.
08. Section 2 (40) of the M.V. Act, 1939 defines
the 'stage carriage' means a motor vehicle constructed or
adapted to carry more than six passengers excluding the
driver for hire or reward at separate fares paid by or for
individual passengers, either for the whole journey or for
stages of the journey.
09. Further it is appropriate to look at Section 147
of the M.V. Act, as under:-
"Section 147 :- Requirement of policies and
limits of liability .- (1) In order to comply with
the requirements of this Chapter, a policy of
insurance must be a policy which-
(a) is issued by a person who is an authorised
insurer; and
NC: 2024:KHC-K:87
(b) insures the person or classes of persons
specified in the policy to the extent specified in
sub-section (2):-
(i) against any liability which may be incurred
by him in respect of the death of or bodily injury
to any person including owner of the goods or
his authorised representative carried in the
motor vehicle or damage to any property of a
third party caused by or arising out of the use of
the motor vehicle in a public place;
(ii) against the death of or bodily injury to any
passenger of a transport vehicle, except
gratuitous passengers of a goods vehicle,
caused by or arising out of the use of the motor
vehicle in a public place."
10. In the light of the Section 2(35) to 2(40) and
Section 147 of the Act, though, the policy is an Act Policy,
still the insurance company is liable to pay the
compensation, as there is a compulsory coverage.
11. Hence, the appeal of the owner is allowed
holding that the insurance company alone is liable to pay
the compensation.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:87
(a) Respondent-Insurance Company shall deposit the
said compensation amount with accrued interest
before the Tribunal within a period of 8 (Eight)
weeks.
(b) The Registry is directed to return the Trial Court
Record to the Tribunal along with the certified copy of
the order passed by this court forthwith without any
delay.
(c) No Costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand
closed.
Amount in deposit made by the owner of the vehicle,
is at liberty to withdraw the same.
The learned counsel for the respondent - insurance
company submits that within two weeks from today, he
will file the Vakalat.
Sd/-
Judge
KJJ
CT:VD
