[MACT] Tribunal Must Examine Question Of Deceased Being Gratuitous Passenger Before Attaching Liability On Insurance Company: J&K High Court
While remanding a case to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the J&K High Court said that in the present accident case, the fact that the deceased was a gratuitous passenger (travelling without paying) and not the labourer of the offending truck owner on the date of the accident was not established for the purpose of compensation.The court said that the same could have been established...
While remanding a case to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the J&K High Court said that in the present accident case, the fact that the deceased was a gratuitous passenger (travelling without paying) and not the labourer of the offending truck owner on the date of the accident was not established for the purpose of compensation.
The court said that the same could have been established by examining the officials of the Construction Company-HCC, where the deceased was alleged to be working on a monthly remuneration or, in the alternative, the driver or owner of the offending vehicle should have been examined by the Tribunal, which it failed to do.
A bench of Justice MA Chowdhary observed that it is a settled position of law that in a case where it is proved that a person travelling by the offending vehicle as a gratuitous passenger, is not covered under the policy of insurance, in such eventuality, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay compensation to the Claimants concerned, even under the statutory provision of pay and recover. That being so, this Court is of the considered opinion that the tribunal has wrongly decided issue No.3 while passing the impugned Award.
The High Court acknowledged the contentions raised by the Appellants that the registered owner of the vehicle who was insured with the company was a proper and necessary party and despite the objections raised by the insurance company same was not impleaded in the case.
The court observed that “This issue, too, appears to have been wrongly decided by the Tribunal, inasmuch as, without the registered owner of the offending vehicle heaving been arrayed as a party Respondent in the Claim proceedings, it was fallacious on the part of the Tribunal to decide the matter under presumptions. This is so because the matter with regard to the liability of payment of compensation to the Claimants is essentially a dispute to be decided between the Insurer/ Insurance Company and the Insured/ registered owner of the offending vehicle.”
BACKGROUND:
The deceased in this case was travelling in a vehicle LP Truck, being driven by its driver rashly and negligently and the driver of the aforesaid vehicle lost control of the vehicle due to which the vehicle skidded off the road and fell down into a deep gorge resulting into his death.
The FIR came to be registered with regard to the aforesaid accident in Police Station under Sections 279, 337 and 427 RPC. The trial Court passed an award granting compensation of Rs 12,65,000 to the claimant on 'No Fault basis Liability.' The said award was challenged in the present Appeal.
The High Court held that the matter be remanded to the tribunal maintaining the quantum of compensation, as the same was not challenged, with a direction to the Tribunal to array the registered owner of the offending vehicle being the registered owner/ insured of the offending vehicle.
Further, the court directed the tribunal to decide the issue with regard to the liability of the registered owner of the offending vehicle, as Insured to pay compensation to the Claimants for the death of the deceased, particularly in view of the assertion of the Appellant/Insurance Company that the deceased was travelling by the offending vehicle as a gratuitous passenger.
APPEARANCE:
Aatir Javed Kawoosa, Advocate for Appellants
Sheikh Abdul Hai, Advocate for Respondents.
Case Title: National Insurance Company Limited vs Gulshana Begum & Ors. 2025
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 24