F.A.O.NO. 463 OF 2005 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 463 OF 2005 Date of decision:31st August, 2010 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, having its Regional Office, Sector 17, Chandigarh, through its Manager. .......Appellant Versus Vijender Sharma and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Sanjiv Pabbi, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respondents. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?Yes/No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The Insurance Company is in appeal challenging liability on the ground that the claimant injured was travelling in the insured's truck as a passenger by paying a fare of Rs. 45/- from Behroad to Delhi. In spite of the contention by the Insurer that there has no insurance cover for a passenger in a goods carried having paid fare, the Tribunal has purported to rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that was alleged to lay down that such a person shall become entitled to make the claim after the amendment of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1994. It is a clear misunderstanding of law and on the other hand, the law is F.A.O.NO. 463 OF 2005 2 clearly settled with the decision in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Asha Rani and others (2003) 2 SCC 223, that there could be no policy of insurance to cover the risk to a passenger in a goods carriage and it is not required to be covered under Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act also. 2. The liability cast on the Insurance Company is clearly wrong and it is set aside. The liability shall be only on the owner of the vehicle and the claimant's right of enforcement shall be available only against the owner. 3. At the time when this petition was admitted on 24.01.2005, Bench of this Court has granted an order of stay on deposit of 50% of the amount awarded. If, after such a deposit any amount has been withdrawn by the claimant, the insurer shall exercise the right of recovery only as against the insured and not against the claimant. No part of the award which is not already recovered by the claimant pursuant to the award would be recovered from the insurer hereinafter. 4. The appeal is allowed with such observations. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 31st August, 2010 Shivani Kaushik