National Insurance Company Ltd vs William Jenifar Ajitha Alias Jenifar ... on 14 March, 2007
He also placed reliance on the decision reported in 1988 ACJ 251: AIR 1989 Karnataka 104 (MANAGING DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA POWER CORPN. LTD. Vs. GEETHA) relied on by the appellant and 2004 ACJ 190 (NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. GEETA SINHA) to sustain the award granted in his favour. Learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent also placed reliance on the policy cover and submitted that the inhibitions under Section 147 cannot apply to the vehicle belonging to persons like the fourth respondent. He also highlighted the fact that the vehicle was used wholly for the purpose of carrying the employees as a part of the welfare measure introduced and that, as such, the employees cannot be equated to gratuitous passengers travelling in a public vehicle. He emphasized on the fact that it is not a public carrier and it has not been denied by the Insurance Company. He also referred to the terms of the policy and submitted that there are no violations of the terms and conditions. In the light of the said circumstances, he submitted that the Tribunal had correctly arrived at the conclusion on the question of the Insurance Company's liability to pay the compensation.