In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh F.A.O. No.4993 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: September 07, 2009 ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. .. Appellant Vs. Amit Jain and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Sandeep Suri, Advocate for the appellant. Mrs. Kiran Bala Jain, Advocate for the respondent No.1. A.N. Jindal, J This appeal is directed against the award dated 6.8.2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambala, in Claim Petition No.26 of 2008 (Amit Jain vs. Devi Chand and others), whereby, the claimant- respondent No.1 (herein referred as 'respondent No.1') was awarded a sum of Rs.8,94,820/- along with interest @ 9% per annum against the respondents jointly and severely on account of the damage to the car of the respondent No.1, bearing registration No.HR-27J-0054. The appellant company has not disputed the negligence of the respondent No.2 Devi Chand who by his act of rashness and negligence struck against the car of the respondent No.1 and damaged the same. The only challenge made is that since as per policy, the liability of the company towards third party property was to the extent of Rs.7,50,000/-, therefore, the respondent No.1 could recover the amount to that extent only. The remaining amount could be recovered from respondent No.2 and 3. Having examined the policy, the relevant extract of the policy is reproduced as under :- “Limits of liability : (a) under Section 11 – 1(i) of the policy – Death of or bodily injury : Such amount as is necessary to meet there requirements of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. (b) under Section 11 – 1 (ii) of the policy – Damage to the F.A.O. No.4993 of 2008 (O&M) -2- *** Third Party Property Rs,750,000/-; PA Cover for Owner- Driver under Section III: CSI Rs.200,000/-; Voluntary Deductable Rs.0/-. On perusal of the terms and conditions of the policy as referred to above, it transpires that the liability of the company towards third party damage was to the extent of Rs.7,50,000/-, therefore, the company was bound to discharge its liability to the extent of the limit as provided in the contract between the insurer and the insured and the respondents No.2 and 3 could be held liable for the remaining amount of compensation and the appellant was not liable to pay any amount beyond terms of the policy. As such, this appeal is partly allowed. The liability of the appellant would be governed by the terms of the policy i.e. Rs.7,50,000/- which it would be liable to pay and the respondents No.2 and 3 would be liable to pay the remaining compensation out of the remaining award amount. No order as to costs. September 07, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge