Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bijeram vs Mangudas And Ors. on 30 April, 2002
Equivalent citations: 2004ACJ153
Author: S.B. Sakrikar
Bench: S.B. Sakrikar
JUDGMENT Sakrikar, J.
1. The appellant, owner of the offending vehicle, has directed this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, against the award dated 1.9.1997 passed by M.A.C.T., Mandsaur in M.A.C.C. Case No. 33 of 1997 thereby exonerating the respondent No. 3 insurance company from the liability of payment of compensation as awarded in favour of respondent No. 1 (claimant).
2. For the purpose of disposal of this appeal, facts in brief are, that a case for grant of compensation was filed before the Tribunal by the claimant-respondent No. 1 against the present appellant who was indicated as owner of the offending vehicle; respondent No. 2 driving the vehicle at the time of alleged accident and the respondent No. 3, the insurance company with whom the alleged tractor was insured.
3. It is not in dispute that the alleged accident occurred at 4 p.m. on 2.12.1992, the learned Tribunal allowed the petition filed on behalf of the claimant and awarded compensation of Rs. 72,000 together with the interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum in favour of the claimant payable by appellant and respondent No. 2. The insurance company was exonerated from the liability of payment of awarded amount mainly on the ground that as per case of the insurance company the time of commencing of policy was mentioned in the policy and according to the insurance policy, it commenced from 5.30 p.m. on 2.12.1992.
4. Agreeing by the aforesaid award of the Claims Tribunal exonerating insurance-company from the liability of payment of awarded amount, the appellant owner has filed this appeal.
5. I have heard Mr. Vinay Vijaywargiya, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. S.V. Dandwate, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3 insurance company. No one appears for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
6. The only contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that as per case of the appellant he submitted the proposal form along with amount of the premium to the agent of the insurance company at 11 a.m. on 2.12.1992. As such, the policy commences from the time of handing over the proposal form and premium to the agent of the insurance company, in view of the provision of Section 64VB of the Insurance Act. As against this, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 Mr. S.V. Dandwate submitted that as per the provision of Section 64VB of the Insurance Act, the policy may commence from the time and date when the proposal along with premium was handed over to the agent of the insurance company, but under the same provision, it is mentioned that the risk under the policy shall commence from the time of acceptance of the proposal and issuance of the cover note. He also contended that in view of series of decisions of the Supreme Court, the risk under the insurance policy shall come into force from the time and date mentioned in the cover note or in the policy, as the case may be and in no case prior to that. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Apex Court in case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Bhagwati Devi, 1999 ACJ 534 (SC).
7. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. In this case, insurance policy is available on the record and on perusal of the insurance policy (Exh. D-4), it emerged that in this policy the effective date and time of the insurance is mentioned as 5.30 p.m. on 2.12.1992 to 1.12.1993. In view of the decision of the Apex Court, when the time of commencement is mentioned in the insurance policy it shall become effective for the liability of payment of compensation from the time onwards, as mentioned in the insurance policy. In this case, it is not disputed that the alleged accident occurred much prior to the time of commencement of the insurance policy (Exh. D-4). As such, in my considered opinion, the learned Claims Tribunal has committed no error in exonerating the insurance company from the liability of the payment of awarded amount on the ground that at the time of the accident the policy was not effective.
8. In the result, the appeal filed on behalf of the appellant fails and liable to be dismissed. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed without any order as to costs.