Skip to content


United India Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Gurmail Kaur and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectMotor Vehicles
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On
Case NumberF.A.F.O. No. 385 of 1978
Judge
Reported inII(1985)ACC416; AIR1985P& H355; [1987]62CompCas190(P& H)
AppellantUnited India Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd.
RespondentGurmail Kaur and ors.
Cases ReferredNew India Assurance Company Limited v. Norati Devi
Excerpt:
.....when the parties concerned acquire knowledge of passing of the said order. - 2. it is well-settled, as was also held by the full bench in oriental fire & general insurance company limited v......under an award made against him by the motor accidents claims tribunal.3. in the present case, the party impleaded as the owner of the offending vehicle was m/s. jagmohan lal chand, commission agents, moga. it was the finding of the tribunal that this firm m/s. jagmohan lal chand was neither the registered owner of the vehicle nor its insured. the owner was in fact one jagmohan lal, but he had not been impleaded as a party to the claim application. the tribunal, however, held the said jagmohan lal, but he had not been impleaded as a party to the claim application. the tribunal, however, held the said jagmohan lal to be liable, following the judgment of the division bench in new india assurance company limited v. norati devi, air 1978 punj & har 113, where it was held that the insurance.....
Judgment:

1. The challenge in appeal here is to the liability of the Insurance Company for payment of Rs. 28,000/- awarded as compensation to the claimants they being the widow and children of Bhopinder Singh deceased, who was run over and killed on account of the rash and negligent driving of the truck PUF-5688. This happened on June 20, 1972 opposite Guru Nanak Engineering College on Gill Road, Ludhiana.

2. It is well-settled, as was also held by the Full Bench in Oriental Fire & General Insurance Company Limited v. Bachan Singh, (1982) 84 Pun LR 280: (AIR 1982 Punj & Har 267), that the liability of the insurer arises only when a judgment is obtained against the insured. In other words, it is only then and then alone that the insurer is obliged to pay the claimants the amount due by the insured under an Award made against him by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal.

3. In the present case, the party impleaded as the owner of the offending vehicle was M/s. Jagmohan Lal Chand, Commission Agents, Moga. It was the finding of the Tribunal that this firm M/s. Jagmohan Lal Chand was neither the registered owner of the vehicle nor its insured. The owner was in fact one Jagmohan Lal, but he had not been impleaded as a party to the claim application. The Tribunal, however, held the said Jagmohan Lal, but he had not been impleaded as a party to the claim application. The Tribunal, however, held the said Jagmohan Lal to be liable, following the judgment of the Division Bench in New India Assurance Company Limited v. Norati Devi, AIR 1978 Punj & Har 113, where it was held that the Insurance Company could be held liable even if the insurer had not been impleaded as a party to the proceedings. This judgment has since been specifically overruled by the Full Bench in Bachan Singh's case. (AIR 1982 Punj & Har) (supra).

4. Such being the position here, there can be no escape from the conclusion that no liability can be fastened upon the Insurance Company with regard to the compensation awarded. It is thus respondent Madho Singh alone, who would be liable in this case.

5. This appeal is accordingly hereby accepted. There will, however, be no order as to costs.

6. Appeal allowed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //