IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.477 of 1992 (O&M) Date of decision:24.01.2011 The Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, Gurgaon. ....Appellant versus Smt. Pushpa Devi and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr.Tejinder Pal Singh, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, Advocate, for respondents 1 to 3. ---- 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 at the instance of the Insurance Company for restriction of liability for a risk to a third party involving a goods vehicle. The limitation of liability as prescribed under the policy states that it shall be “on such amount it is necessary to meet the requirements of Motor Vehicles Act of 1939”. The liability as was statutorily made a compulsory was upto a limit of Rs.1,50,000/-. The policy had been issued on 06.04.1989. Section 147 states that the limitation of liability shall continue for a period of four months after the commencement of the Motor Vehicles Act of 1988 or till the expiry of the date of policy whichever is earlier. In this case, the date of expiry of the policy falls later and, therefore, the relevant date will be four months from the date FAO No.477 of 1992 (O&M) - 2 - of the commencement of the Act which period would expire on 22.09.1989. The accident has taken place on 07.07.1989. It means the liability shall stand restricted only to the statutory limit of Rs.1,50,000/-. Any amount in excess of Rs.1,50,000/- shall be recovered by the claimant against the owner/insured. The award of the Tribunal stands modified, restricting the liability of the insurer at Rs.1,50,000/- with interest as awarded by the Tribunal. If the entire amount as awarded by the Tribunal has already been recovered by the claimant, the insurer shall recover the amount paid in excess from the insured/owner and not from the claimant. 2. The appeal is allowed on the above terms. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 24.01.2011 sanjeev