FAO No.731 of 1990 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1. FAO No.731 of 1990 DATE OF DECISION: February 1, 2011 HMT LTD. PINJORE ...APPELLANT VERSUS SMT. RAJ KUMARI AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS PRESENT: MR. LALIT THAKUR, ADVOCATE FOR SH. R.K. CHIBBAR, SR. ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT. NONE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 3 AND 5 TO 7. MR. RAVINDER ARORA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.4. 2. FAO No.1171 of 1989 M/S FAZILKA DABWALA TRANSPORT P. CO. LTD. ...APPELLANT VERSUS SMT. HAR NANDI ETC. ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN. 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? Yes/No 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? Yes/No 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the digest? Yes/No ---- PRESENT: MR. VINEET SONI, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT. NONE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 4. MR. RAVINDER ARORA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.5. K.KANNAN, J.(ORAL) 1. Both these appeals address the same issue of liability of the insurance company in a case of third party claim against the owner-insured. FAO No.731 of 1990 -2- 2. The appeal is by the owner of the vehicle which had been involved in the accident. The owner is aggrieved by the restriction of liability applied in a claim for compensation sought at the instance of the Third party. The accident was during the period when the Motor Vehicles Act of 1939 applied and the terms of policy were also as per the requirements of the said Act. Section 95 of the Motor Vehicles Act capped the liability for an insurer for a transport vehicle carrying passengers to 50,000/- for a claim emanating from a Third party. I have seen through the terms of the policy and the appellant has paid only 240/- which was the basic premium for liability to public risk. The additional premium which had been paid for own damage and for other risk included flood and earthquake. The specific term under the policy relating to the limit of liability was that it would extend to the amount in respect of anyone accident as would meet the requirement of the Motor Vehicles Act of 1939. I have already observed with reference the statutory right of liability for the insurer to be `50,000/-. The award of the Tribunal was, therefore, in terms of liability and in terms of the policy. No exception could be taken against it. 3. The appeal by the owner is, therefore, dismissed confirming the award of the Tribunal. February 1, 2011 (K.KANNAN) Gulati JUDGE