High CourtsSingle Bench(2001) 04 PAT CK 0080

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. vs Md. Nasiruddin and Others

Patna High Court · Decided on 18 April 2001 · Citation: (2001) 3 PLJR 232

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.N. Pathak, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
M.A. No. 85 of 1994

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 359 words

S.N. Pathak, J.—This misc. appeal is directed against the order dated 8.12.93 passed by the Claims Tribunal, Aurangabad in Motor Vehicle Claim case No. 18/92. Appellant before this Court is Oriental Insurance Company.

2.

Appellant''s submission is that interim compensation of Rs. 25,000/- was allowed to the claimants-Respondents 1 and 2. However, the claimants were not entitled to receive any compensation, much less interim compensation because Insurance company was not liable in so far concerned tractor was being used for ferrying passengers for which it was not ensured or registered. The concerned tractor was registered and ensured for carrying goods as also for agricultural purpose. So when the deceased died while travelling on the concerned tractor, perhaps, tractor was being used to carry the passengers for hire. So insurance company was not laible to pay any compensation.

3.

Respondent No. 3, owner of the concerned tractor appeared and contested this misc. appeal. The contention of Respondent No. 3 is that the concerned tractor was being used for canying goods and not as a passenger vehicle. However, the Respondents lawyer failed to point out from the rejoinder filed in the lower court whether this ground that the concerned tractor was being used for carrying the goods was taken. In such a situation, it is difficult to come to a finding that the concerned tractor when it caused accident resulting into the death of the deceased was being used as vehicle for carrying goods or as vehicle for carrying the passengers. So in the circumstances of the case, it was owner of the tractor con cerned who was liable to pay compensation by way of interim relief.

4.

In the result, this misc. appeal is allowed and the impugnedorder is set aside. Respondent No. 3 is directed to pay compensation amount of Rs. 25,000/- to the claimants who are Respondent 1 and 2 of this appeal. If owner is entitled to any indemnity from the Insurance company, he is free to stake his claim and take indemnity amount as provided under the law.

5.

The amount which Insurance Company deposited before this Court may be withdrawn by it as per procedure.