FAO No.702 of 2001 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.702 of 2001 Date of Decision. 08.09.2010 National Insurance Company Ltd., Bhandari House 4/24, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi through its Regional Manager ......Appellant Versus Smt. Marg Shree widow of Lance Naik (Electrical) R-1, Veer Pal Singh and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. Rajat Khanna, Advocate for the appellant. None for the respondents. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is by the insurance company on an issue, which simply does not exist. The Tribunal has found the owner and driver, who are respondents No.1 and 2, liable but it appears that Rs.50,000/- has already been paid under principle of no fault under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act by the insurance company. In no part of the award, there is any mention that the insurance company is liable. On the basis of the award where the Tribunal found that the driver did not have a valid driving licence, the best that the insurance company could have done, was to apply for restitution in the manner provided under Section 144 of the Civil Procedure Code and recover the amount from the owner insured. FAO No.702 of 2001 -2- Even then a right has become suspect by virtue of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Eshwarappa @ Maheshwarappa and another Vs. C.S. Gurushanthappa and another 2010 (8) SCALE 263 where it has been held, in relation to unexceptional liability under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act thus: "15. Seen in isolation the above provisions might appear harsh, unreasonable and arbitrary in as much as these create the liability of the vehicle(s) owner(s) even where the accident did not take place due to any wrongful act, neglect or default of the owner or owners of the vehicle or vehicles concerned but entirely due to the wrongful act, neglect or default of the person in respect of whose death or permanent disablement the claim has been made but the above provisions must be seen along with certain provisions of Chapter XI. Section 146 forbids the use of the vehicle in a public place unless there is in force, in relation to the use of the vehicle, a policy of insurance complying with the provisions of that chapter. Section 147 contains the provisions that are commonly referred to as `Act only insurance'. The provisions of sections 146 and 147 are meant to create the large pool of money for making payments of no fault compensation. Thus the liability arising from section 140 would almost invariably be passed on to the insurer to be paid off from the vast fund created by virtue of sections 146 and 147 of the Act unless the owner of the vehicle causing accident is guilty FAO No.702 of 2001 -3- of some flagrant violation of the law." 2. The appeal is disposed of with the above observations. The insurer shall have no further relief either here or before the Tribunal. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE September 08, 2010 Pankaj*