United India Insurance Company Limited vs Munna Singh Raj and Others

D.R. Deshmukh, J.—Heard on I.A. No. 709/2007. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that since this M.A.C. is against an order u/s 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the question of filing of a certificate copy of the order u/s 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act does not arise. Considered and allowed.

Heard on admission. The appellant has impugned the order dated 20-12-2006 passed by the Additional M.A.C.T., Korba in Claims Case No. 104/2006 whereby the appellant/insurer was directed to pay interim compensation of Rs. 50,000/- to the legal representatives of the deceased.

Learned Counsel for the appellant docs not dispute the following facts:

(A) that the deceased was travelling in a light motor vehicle bearing No. CG 12-9599 on 2-5-2005,

(B) death of Raj Singh resulted due to the accident by the aforsaid vehicle and

(C) that the above mentioned vehicle was insured by the appellant on the date of the accident.

Learned Counsel for the appellant contended that since the deceased was travelling in a goods vehicle which was being used for carrying passangers at the time of the accident, there was a clear breach of policy and therefore the insurer is not liable to pay intermim compesation u/s 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Reliance was placed on the The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kamalalochan Kamalo and Others, .

Having heard the learned Counsel for the appellant I have perused in inpugned order. The arguments of the learned Counsel for the appellant have no force in view of the admitted facts mentioned above. In the application u/s 140 of the Motor Vehicle Act, the MACT is not required into an enquiry whether there was breach of policy or not. If at the time (sic) disposal of the application for compensation, the MACT is of the view that there was a fundamental breach of policy a right could be given to the insurer to recover the conpensation from the owner. In view of the existence of the facts mentioned in Paragraphs 4-A, B & C, the learned MACT was wholly justified in awarding the interim compensation of Rs. 50,000/- against the appellant insurer.

In this view of the matter, the impugned order cannot be faulted with. This appeal being devoid of merit is dismissed, at the stage of admission.