National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ajit Kumar & Ors.
Provision of Section 95(1) of the old Act is in pari materia with Section 147(1) of the Act, as it stood prior to the amendment in 1994  Factual aspects need not be gone into in detailas there is practically no dispute on the factual aspects. The Procedural History stand as: – The court reiterated the following judgements to discuss the law in the instant case.In the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Satpal Singh [2000(1) SCC 237] it was held that the Liability of the insurer was fixed and is liable to pay compensation for the death or bodily injury to a person travelling in goods vehicle as Passenger under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 as the same has been stated by the Learned Counsel of appellant.In the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Asha Rani &amp; Ors. [2003(2)SCC 223] &amp; Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Devireddy Konda Reddy &amp; Ors. [2003(2)SCC 339] it was held that the provisions of the 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 insurer would have no liability therefor. ISSUE BEFORE THE COURT: Whether the Insurer is liable to pay the Compensation for the death of or bodily injury caused to a person travelling in goods vehicle as Passenger under Motor Vehicle Act,1988. RATIO OF THE COURT The Ld. Counsel from the Appellant side submitted that the Liability of the insurer was fixed and is liable to pay compensation for the death or bodily injury to a person travelling in goods vehicle as Passenger under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988But, on the other hand, Ld. Counsel from the Respondent Side submitted that the provisions of the Act are not mixed with any Statutory Liability on the owner of a vehicle to get his vehicle insured for any passenger traveling in a goods carriage and the insurer would have no liability to pay the compensation for the death or the bodily injury caused to a person traveling in a goods carriage as a passenger. It is further described as the Amendments made to the sections of the Motor Vehicle Act:-According to Section 2(8) “Goods Vehicle” of the old act and Section 2(14) “Goods Carriage” of the Amended act states that the Legislative intention was to prohibit goods vehicle from carrying any passenger. Further, it also states that the expression “Goods Carriage” is solely for carriage of goods not for carrying any passenger.Section 147 of the Act mandates compulsory coverage against death of or bodily injury to any passenger of “Public Service Vehicle” which is defined under Section 2(25) of the Old Act &amp; Section 2(35) of the Amended Act. The proviso makes it further clear that compulsory coverage in respect of drivers and conductors of Public Service Vehicle and employees carried in goods vehicle would be limited to liability under the Workmen’s Compensation Act as there is no reference to any passenger in goods carriage.The inevitable conclusion, therefore, is that provisions of theAct do not enjoin any statutory liability on the owner of a vehicle toget his vehicle insured for any passenger traveling in a goods carriageand the insurer would have no liability therefor. DECISION HELD BY COURT: It was held that the Respondent is not liable to get any compensation under the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 as the amended act prohibits the word of carrying of Passenger in “Goods carriage” according to section 2(14) and can avail the remedy for recovery of the amount from the available laws.
 Appeal6915 69103 National Insurance Co.Ltd. Ajit Kumar and Ors. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02 09 2003 DORAISWAMY RAJU & ARIJIT PASAYAT JUDGMENT Arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 18242 18243 2002 ARIJIT PASAYAT J Leave granted The only question raised in these appeals is whether the insurer is liable to pay the compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 in short the ’Act’) for the death or bodily injury to a person traveling in goods vehicle as passenger. Liability of the insurer was fixed by relying on this Court’s decision in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Satpal SinghSCC 237 Factual aspects need not be gone into in detail as there is practically no dispute on the factual aspects. Learned counsel for the insurer appellant submitted that Section 149of the Act is etymologically different from provisoto Section 96of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939and therefore the ratio in Satpal Singh’s case supra) has no application. In response learned counsel appearing for the claimants submitted that in the said case such a stand has been negatived and it has been held that insurer is liable to pay compensation to gratuitous passengers This Court had occasion to deal with cases of passengers traveling in goods vehicles which met with accident resulting in death of such person or bodily injury. Such cases belong to three categories i.e.those covered by the old Actthose covered by the Act and 3) those covered by amendment of the Act in 1994 by the Motor Vehicles Amendment) Act 1994this Court proceeded on the footing that provision of Section 95(1) of the old Act is in pari materia with Section 147(1) of the Act as it stood prior to the amendment in 1994. On a closer reading of the expressions "goods vehicle" "public service vehicle" "stage carrier" and "transport vehicle" occurring in Sections 2(8) 2(25) 2(29) and 2(33) of the old Act with the corresponding provisions i.e. Section 2(14) 2(35) 2(40) and 2(47) of the Act it is clear that there are conceptual differences. The provisions read as follows: 2(8) "goods vehicle" means any motor vehicle constructed or adapted for use for the carriage of goods or any motor vehicle not so constructed or adapted when used for the carriage of goods solely or in addition to passengers 2(25) "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 motorcab contract carriage and stage carriage 2(29) "stage carriage" means a motor vehicle carrying or adapted to carry more than six persons excluding the driver which carries passengers for hire or reward at separate fares paid by or for individual passengers either for the whole journey or for stages of the journey 2(33) "transport vehicle" means a public service vehicle or a goods vehicle 2(14) "goods carriage" any motor vehicle constructed or adapted for use solely for the carriage of goods or any motor vehicle not so constructed or adapted when used for the carriage of goods 2(35) "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 maxicab a motorcab contract and stage carriage 2(40) "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 2(47) "transport vehicle" means a public service vehicle a goods carriage an educational institution bus or a private service vehicle of the Act reads as ’Liability’ wherever used in relation to the death of or bodily injury to any person includes liability in respect thereof under Section 140 Third party risks in the background of vehicles which are subject matter of insurance are dealt with in Chapter VIII of the old Act and Chapter XI of the Act. Proviso to Section 147 needs to be juxtaposed with Section 95 of the old Act. Proviso to Section 147 of the Act reads as follows Provided that a policy shall not be required i) to cover liability in respect of the death arising out of and in the course of his employment of the employee of a person insured by the policy or in respect of bodily injury sustained by such an employee arising out of and in the course of his employment other than a liability arising under the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1923in respect of the death of or bodily injury to any such employee â\200\223 a) engaged in driving the vehicle or b) if it is a public service vehicle engaged as conductor of the vehicle or in examining tickets on the vehicles or c) if it is a goods carriage being carried in the vehicle or ii) to cover any contractual liability It is of significance that proviso appended to Section 95 of the old Act contained clausewhich does not find place in the new Act. The same reads as follows: except where the vehicle is a vehicle in which passengers are carried for hire or reward or by reason of or in pursuance of a contract of employment to cover liability in respect of the death of or bodily injury to persons being carried in or upon or entering or mounting or alighting from the vehicle at the time of the occurrence of the event out of which a claim arises The difference in the language of "goods vehicle" as appearing in the old Act and "goods carriage" in the Act is of significance. A bare reading of the provisions makes it clear that the legislative intent was to prohibit goods vehicle from carrying any passenger. This is clear from the expression "in addition to passengers" as contained in definition of "goods vehicle" in the old Act. The position becomes further clear because the expression used is "goods carriage" is solely for the carriage of goods". Carrying of passengers in a goods carriage is not contemplated in the Act. There is no provision similar to clauseof the proviso appended to Section 95 of the old Act prescribing requirement of insurance policy. Even Section 147 of the Act mandates compulsory coverage against death of or bodily injury to any passenger of "public service vehicle". The proviso makes it further clear that compulsory coverage in respect of drivers and conductors of public service vehicle and employees carried in goods vehicle would be limited to liability under the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1923SCC 223) and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Devireddy Konda Reddy and Ors.SCC 339 Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that respondent No.1 should be permitted to avail such remedies as are available in law for recovering any amount to be paid as compensation from a person liable to pay compensation at the first instance. No permission is necessary for such purpose. If respondent No.1 has any remedy in law it is open to pursue it in accordance with law. The appeals are allowed by setting aside the judgment of the Tribunal and the High Court. There shall be no order as to costs. 