Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2. Learned counsel for the appellant/petitioners, after referring to paras No.17, 19 and 26 of impugned award as well as depositions of applicant witnesses Kaushalya, Suppa Bai and Uttam Singh and further, relying upon Original Insurance Company Limited Vs. Devireddy Konda Reddy and Others, (2003) 2 SCC and National Insurance Company Vs. Rattani and Others, (2009) 2 SCC 75, submits that claimant/deceased were traveling in goods vehicle. Therefore, they, being gratuitous passengers, Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation.

7. Perusal of principles of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Rattani and Others, (2009) 2 SCC 75 and Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Devireddy Konda Reddy and Others, reported in (2003) 2 SCC 339, and National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Cholleti Bharatamma and Others, (2008) 1 SCC 423, reveal that insurance company is not liable to pay compensation to any persons travelling as gratuitous passengers in commercial/goods carrying vehicle but from Rattani (supra) and Cholleti Bharatamma(supra), it evident that if persons travelling in goods carrying vehicle/commercial vehicle are owner/representative of goods, then, position would be different.

11. So far as liability to pay compensation with respect to deceased Rajjan and injured Imrat is concerned, in the instant case, offending vehicle is a goods carrying vehicle/commercial vehicle. It is also well settled that no passengers/persons as passengers can be carried in the goods carrying vehicle/commercial vehicle (Cholleti Bharatamma(supra), Rattani(supra) and Devireddy(supra). Further, it is also well settled from above pronouncement, etc. that owner of goods/representative of owner of such goods can travel in the cabin of goods carrying vehicle/commercial vehicle.