1 S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.1394/1999 (The New India Assurance Co. Ltd Vs. Jagdish Prasad and anr.) Date of Judgment : 24-02-2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GUMAN SINGH Mr. R.S.Rathore,for the appellants. Mr. Mukesh Verma, for the respondents. This appeal has been preferred on behalf of Insurance Company against the Judgment & Award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Baran vide judgment dated 13.2.1998 whereby the respondent-claimant Jagdish Prasad was awarded a sum of Rs.47,800/- as compensation for the injuries sustained in the accident and the joint & several liability was fixed including that of appellant-Insurance Company. 2. The challenge in the appeal pertains to finding on issue no.4 wherein the learned Tribunal decided the issue against the Insurance Company by holding that there has been no breech of policy and hence Insurance Company was liable for the compensation awarded. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned Tribunal has failed 2 to appreciate the fact that the vehicle involved is a private jeep and the policy issued was 'Act only' policy with the condition that the vehicle shall be used only for social & domestic work of the insured only. It is also submitted that vehicle was placed on hire to the Bank and, as such, there is breech of condition of the policy and the Insurance Company deserves to be exonerated. He has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme court reported in 2006 RAR 42(SC)-United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Tilak Singh and ors. on the point that policy being statutory policy, Insurance Company owed no liability towards the injuries suffered by the gratuitous passengers and the same would apply with equal force to gratuitous passengers in any other vehicle also. He has also relied upon the judmgnet of Coordinate Bench of this court decided on 4.12.2006 in CMA No.764/94 (Amarjeet Singh Vs. Nand Singh and ors.). 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents supported the judgment of the Tribunal and submitted that the learned Tribunal has taken into consideration 3 evidence adduced during inquiry and has awarded adequate compensation and calls for no interference. It is further submitted that vehicle was being used by the owner of the vehicle for his own business and, as such, there is no breech of policy. 5. After hearing the rival contentions, and going through the award as also record of the case, it is revealed that the fact is not disputed that the vehicle was being used for recovery of loan of the Bank and this was not business of the owner of the vehicle and, as such, vehicle was found to be used for hire for the recovery of the Bank loans. Therefore, this amounts to breech of the policy and, as such, Insurance Company deserves to be exonerated. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent- claimants submits that he has received the amount under the award, as such, the appellant Insurance Company deserves to be given right of recovery from the owner. 7. Accordingly, the appeal of the appellant Insurance Company is allowed and the 4 appellant is exonerated from the liability fixed on it. The amount under the award is ordered to be recovered by the appellant Insurance Company from the owner-respondent of the vehicle. The appeal stands disposed of. (GUMAN SINGH),J. Sandeep/- item no.h-27