FAO No.3378 of 2003 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.3378 of 2003 Date of Decision. 18.08.2010 The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Regional Office, SCO Nos.109- 111, Sector 17-D, Chandigarh through its authorized signatory Sh. S.S. Bahri, Dy. Manager ......Appellant Versus Bhoop Singh son of Shri Nihal Singh and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. Navin Kapur, 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 insurance company is on appeal challenging the liability cast on the insurer for the injury of a gratuitous passenger in a goods carriage. The claimants' version was that the deceased had obtained a lift, for he had known the driver and when the vehicle was in transit, the driver attempted to avoid a collision with the jeep coming rashly from the opposite side and the vehicle fell into a ditch that caused the fatal injuries. While addressing the issue of liability, the Tribunal has observed that the Hon'ble Supreme Court had allowed for claims to be sustained against an insurer in the judgment in Ramesh Kumar etc. Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. etc. 2002(1) ACJR 409 that the insurance company would be FAO No.3378 of 2003 -2- liable to gratuitous passenger when they were travelling in a goods carriage. The reading of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is clearly wrong for the Hon'ble Supreme Court has not stated anywhere that the insurer will become liable for a claim arising out of a gratuitous passenger in a goods vehicle. The insurance company cannot bear any liability to pay the claimant and the award against the insurer is set aside and the appeal is allowed. 2. The claimants shall still have a right of enforcement against the owner of the vehicle. If there has been any payment by the insurer during the pendency of appeal to the claimants, the insurer shall exercise the right of recovery only against the owner of the vehicle and not against the claimants. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE August 18, 2010 Pankaj*