IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1333 of 1989 (O&M) Date of decision:23.09.2010 National Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Smt. Jaunati and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate, for the appellant. None for respondents 1 to 10. Mr. Gautam Bhardwaj, Advocate, for Mr. N.K.Khosla, Advocate, for respondent No.11. ---- 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 Insurance Company is in appeal challenging the liability on the ground that the deceased person was a gratuitous passenger in a truck and there was no policy of insurance to cover the risk. As per the version of the claimants, the deceased had loaded onions in the truck and he was travelling along with the goods. The contention of the claimants was that the vehicle in which the deceased was travelling was being driven rashly and negligently and dashed against a yet another truck bearing registration No.RSB-7315 owned by the 4th respondent. The FAO No.1333 of 1989 (O&M) - 2 - deceased was travelling in the vehicle No.RSL-737 driven by the first respondent. The insurer for the vehicle No.RSL-737 was the National Insurance Company and the insurer for the vehicle No.RSB-7315 was the Oriental Insurance Company. The Trial Court found on evidence adduced that the truck bearing No.RSB-7315 had been parked on the kacha portion of the road and the insured's vehicle was driven negligently by his driver, dashed against the rear portion of the truck. On a finding that the insured's truck was responsible for the accident, it awarded compensation in favour of the claimants and made the insurer liable. 2. The contention of the counsel for the Insurance Company is that the accident had taken place on 05.12.1987 and as per the terms of the policy, there was no authority to carry passenger in a goods carriage and the only persons, who were entitled to an insurance cover were the driver and the workmen, who were required to be covered for risk under the Workmen's Compensation Act. Admittedly, the deceased was not a workman but he had hired the vehicle and he was travelling along with the goods. Such a person, according to the insurer, would not be entitled to any insurance cover under the then prevailing law which was governed by the Motor Vehicles Act of 1939. The issue of liability of the insurer for a person travelling in a goods carriage has not been considered by the Tribunal at all. It has merely considered the case from the point of view of the fact that there had been a policy of insurance and, therefore, the insurer was liable. I uphold the contention of the insurer that it would not be liable for a passenger in a goods carriage FAO No.1333 of 1989 (O&M) - 3 - unless he had been shown to be a workman, who was entitled to be covered for risk under the WC Act. 3. The liability cast on the insurer under the award is set aside and the appeal is allowed. If the claimants have recovered the amount from the insurer, the insurer shall recover the same only from the insured and not from the claimants. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 23.09.2010 sanjeev