IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2245 of 2000 Date of decision:06.07.2010 New India Assurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Bir Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr.Inderjeet Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respondents. ---- 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 appeal is by the Insurance Company pleading for restriction of liability to Rs.6,000/- as damage to the vehicle. The claim arose for damage to a maruti car in a collision with a Tata sumo vehicle. The insured stated that the liability to a third party for an accident which the insured's vehicle namely Tata sumo had caused was restricted to Rs.6,000/- since the policy was an Act policy and the Insurance Company was not liable for making any payment in excess of the statutory limit. The Tribunal assessed the damage to the maruti car at Rs.25,000/- and awarded the same against the insured of the offending vehicle Tata sumo. 2. The requirement of compulsory insurance provided under FAO No.2245 of 2000 - 2 - Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act provides under Clause(2) as follows:- “(2) Subject to the proviso to sub-section (1), a policy of insurance referred to in sub-section (1), shall cover any liability incurred in respect of any accident, upto the following limits, namely:- (a) xxxxx (b) in respect of damage to any property of a third party, a limit of rupees six thousand.” 3. If there was a restriction of liability only for Rs.6,000/-, the claim made in excess of the same is clearly untenable. The award of the Tribunal is modified to restrict the liability of the insured only to Rs.6,000/- and the claim in excess shall stand dismissed. The appeal is allowed in part to the above extent. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 06.07.2010 sanjeev