Yagya Prasad Gupta vs Banshrakhan Gupta
2022 Latest Caselaw 16406 MP

                                                     1
                          IN      THE   HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                             AT JABALPUR
                                                  BEFORE
                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                         ON THE 12 th OF DECEMBER, 2022
                                           MISC. APPEAL No. 554 of 2017

                         BETWEEN:-
                         YAGYA PRASAD GUPTA S/O SHIV PRASAD GUPTA
                         OCCUPATION: VEHICLE OWNER R/O VILL-SIRAULI
                         POST-KHADORA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                           .....APPELLANT
                         (NONE)

                         AND
                         1.    BANSHRAKHAN GUPTA S/O LATE DHANPAT
                               GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/O VILL-
                               SINGRAULI BANIYA TOLA POST-PATHROLA PS
                               AND TEH-MAJHAULI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         2.    SMT   SOHBATIYA   @   MANTORIYA    W/O
                               BANSHRAKHAN GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
                               R/O VILL-SINGRAULI BANIYA TOLA POST-
                               PATHROLA PS AND TEH-MAJHAULI (MADHYA
                               PRADESH)

                         3.    SUNITA W/O LATE GOKUL PRASAD GUPTA, AGED
                               ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O VILL-SINGRAULI BANIYA
                               TOLA POST-PATHROLA PS AND TEH-MAJHAULI
                               (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         4.    BIMAL KUMAR S/O LATE GOKUL PRASAD GUPTA,
                               AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS, OCCUPATION: MINOR
                               THROUGH NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER
                               SUNITA GUPTA R/O VILL-SINGRAULI BANIYA
                               TOLA POST-PATHROLA PS AND TEH-MAJHAULI
                               (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         5.    BIMLESH KUMAR D/O LATE GOKUL PRASAD
                               GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                               MINOR    THROUGH    NATURAL  GUARDIAN
                               MOTHER SUNITA GUPTA R/O VILL-SINGRAULI
                               BANIYA TOLA POST-PATHROLA PS AND TEH-
                               MAJHAULI (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time:
12/14/2022 7:14:10 PM
                                                            2
                         6.    BRIJLAL S/O BUDDHSEN KEVAT BORD NO
                               6,MANENDRAGARH, DIST. KORIYA AT PRESENT
                               VILL DADAR POST PATHROLA, DIST. REWA
                               (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         7.    BRANCH OFFICE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE
                               C O . LT D . BRANCH OFFICE, SUDHAR NYAS
                               COMPLEX SIRMOR        CHOURAHA (MADHYA
                               PRADESH)

                                                                                    .....RESPONDENTS
                         (CLAIMANTS BY SHRI SHYAM PRAKASH GUPTA - ADVOCATE)
                         (RESPONDENT NO.7/INSURANCE COMPANY BY SHRI K.K.SINGH -
                         ADVOCATE)

                               T h is appeal coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
                         following:
                                                            ORDER

This appeal is filed by the owner of Tata 407 bearing registration No.MP53-G-0386 being aggrieved of award dated 19.12.2016 passed by learned II Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sidhi in Claim Case No.22/2015 on the ground that the offending vehicle as per the certificate of registration (Exhibit D/2) was having unladen weight of 2250 Kilogram, which comes within the category of a Light Motor Vehicle as per the definition of the Light Motor Vehicle in Section 2(21) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The Claims Tribunal has discussed in Paragraph Nos.21 & 22 of the impugned award that the Insurance Company had examined one Satya Bahadur Singh as N.A.W.4 from the Office of the R.T.O, Sidhi, who had produced registration certificate of the offending vehicle Tata 407 bearing regression No.MP53-G-0386 showing that it was registered as a Commercial Vehicle and also copy of the licence of the non-applicant No.1 driving of the offending vehicle to show that he was having a driving licence to drive a Light Motor Vehicle but was not authorize to drive a Commercial Vehicle. The finding of Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time:

12/14/2022 7:14:10 PM

lack of endorsement is inappropriate in the light of the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Mukund Dewangan versus Oriental Insurance Company Limited & Others (2017) 14 SCC 663.

Learned counsel for the respondent No.7/Insurance Company submits that as per Paragraph 22 of the impugned award, the offending vehicle was insured only for third party insurance. There was no premium charged for the driver or owner of the goods travelling in the offending vehicle. They were not travelling as owner of the goods, therefore, the Insurance Company should be exonerated. He places reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company Limited versus Vedwati & Others AIR 2007 SC 1334 : (2007) 9 SCC 486 to contend that a goods carriage carrying the passenger as per the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act do not enjoin any statutory liability on the owner of a vehicle to get his vehicle insured for any passenger travelling in a goods carriage and the Insurance Company would have no liability and, therefore, the Insurance Company has been rightly exonerated.

Learned counsel for the claimants places reliance on the judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Manuara Khatun & Others versus Rajesh Kumar Singh & Others 2017 (2) ACCD 777 (SC) and Anu Bhanvara & Others versus Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited & Others 2019 (4) ACCD 1908 (SC) to contend that the Insurance Company

will be liable to satisfy the award and can recover the amount from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle. Same is the ratio of law laid down by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble High Court (Bench at Gwalior) in New India Assurance Company Limited versus Sanju & Others 2019 (3) ACCD 1500 (MP).

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time:

12/14/2022 7:14:10 PM

of the Claims Tribunal, it is evident that the vehicle in question is insured under the Act Policy. The certificate of insurance is Exhibit D/3 and Exhibit D/4, which clearly makes a mention of the fact that it was a Liability Only Policy and no premium was charged for any of the passengers and, therefore, in the light of the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company Limited versus Vedwati & Others (supra) and New India Assurance Company Limited versus Asharani & Others (2003) 2 SCC 223, there cannot be any liability fastened on the Insurance Company. The Insurance Company needs to be exonerated and has been rightly exonerated by the Claims Tribunal, which does not call for any interference in this appeal.

Accordingly, this appeal fails and is dismissed. Let record of the Claims Tribunal be sent back.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE amit

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time:

12/14/2022 7:14:10 PM