Anu Bhanvara Etc. vs Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company ... on 9 August, 2019
5. With the said pleadings, deposition of P.W.1 and Exs.A.1-FIR
and Ex.A.2-charge sheet, the learned counsel for the
appellant/insurance company would contend that the claimant
travelled in the auto trolley, which is meant for transport of goods,
as an unauthorised passenger and therefore, the insurance
company is not liable to pay compensation. He would also rely
upon Ex.B.2-judgment and decree in O.P.No.1270 of 2007 passed
by the very same Tribunal in respect of an injured in the very same
accident. In the Ex.B.2-judgment, the Tribunal held that the
injured/claimant therein is a gratuitous passenger and therefore,
the insurance company cannot escape its liability in paying the
compensation. The said finding of the Tribunal is correct and it is
as per the principle laid down by the Apex Court in Anu Bhanvara
Vs. Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited1 and also in
Parminder Singh v New India Assurance Co. Ltd.2, wherein the
Apex Court categorically held that the insurance company has to
pay the compensation at the first instance and recover the same
from the owner of the vehicle, even the claimant is a gratuitous
passenger.