Skip to content


Ahmed Ahaiyat Saiyed (Driver) and anr. Vs. Ibrahim Bhachal Shah and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectInsurance;Motor Vehicles
CourtGujarat High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported inII(1984)ACC323
AppellantAhmed Ahaiyat Saiyed (Driver) and anr.
Respondentibrahim Bhachal Shah and anr.
Excerpt:
- - 7. in the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the judgment and award passed by the motor accident claims tribunal, val sad at navsari, on 30th january 1982 in motor accident claim petition no......and the learned judge after relying upon the evidence of claimant and also considering the estimate mentioned in the panchnama has arrived at the conclusion that the claimant had suffered loss to the tune of rs. 5000/- for goats and sheep. the said finding cannot be said to be in any way unreasonable. but at the same time the insurance policy ex. 46 does not cover the risk to the goods of hirer and therefore, the learned judge was to that extent right in not holding the insurance company liable for the said loss.7. in the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the judgment and award passed by the motor accident claims tribunal, val sad at navsari, on 30th january 1982 in motor accident claim petition no. 159 of 1980 is modified. it is held that the appellants and respondent no. 2 new.....
Judgment:

M.B. Shah, J.

1. Respondent No. 1 had filed Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 159 of 1980 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Valsad at Navsari, contending that he had hired the motor truck bearing Registration No. GTY 4304 owned by appellant No. 2 of which appellant No. 1 was driver for carrying his goods i.e. goats and sheep from Anjar to Bombay. It was his say that he was dealing in goats and sheep and that he was sitting in the cabin of the aforesaid truck when the goats and sheep were carried in it on 31st March 1980.

2. At about 2-30 p.m. when the truck reached near village Astagam of Navsari Taluka, it, overturned and toppled on the side-as a result of which his 65 goats and 3 sheep died on the spot and he was also injured.

3. After recording necessary evidence, the Tribunal by his judgment and order dated 30th January 1982 awarded Rs. 3000/- on the count of physical, mental sufferings, agony, shock and inconvenience etc., Rs. 150/- for medical and other expenses,. Rs. 250/- for loss of income to the claimant respondent No. 1. He held that simple injuries were caused to respondent No. 1 because of the accident, In all he had awarded Rs. 3400/- for the injuries caused to respondent No. 1. He also awarded Rs. 5000/in account of loss of livestock. So the total amount awarded by him to the claimant-respondent No. 1 was Rs. 8400/-. The Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that the Insuiance Company, respondent No. 2, is not liable to pay compensation because the policy does not cover the risk of livestock and that of passengers for hire or reward. He, therefore, directed that the appellants were jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of compensation of Rs. 8400/-with running interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till relisation and the petition against the Insurance Company was dismissed.

4. Against this judgment and award, the appellants, driver and owner of the vehicle respectively, have preferred the aforesaid appeal.

5. The learned Counsel for the appellants contended that the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation jointly and severally. He further contended that there is no evidence on record that respondent No. 1 suffered loss of Rs. 5000/- on the count that 30 goats died because of the accident. It is an admitted fact that respondent No. 1 claimant was travelling in the motor truck and was sitting in the cabin of the aforesaid truck when his goods (goats and sheep) were carried in the truck from Anjar to Bombay. As the claimants was travelling in the goods Vehicle along with his goods, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company agreed with the suggestion of the court in view of 23(1) G.L.R. 411 that the Insurance Company would be liable for the compensation on account of injuries to the claimant. As stated above, the learned Judge has awarded in all Rs. 3400/- for pain and suffering, medical expenses and loss of income. Hence the Insurance Company, respondent No. 2, would he jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 3400/-.

6. With regard to the loss or damage to the goods i.e. goats and sheep, it is an admitted fact that 30 goats died on the spot and the learned Judge after relying upon the evidence of claimant and also considering the estimate mentioned in the panchnama has arrived at the conclusion that the claimant had suffered loss to the tune of Rs. 5000/- for goats and sheep. The said finding cannot be said to be in any way unreasonable. But at the same time the Insurance policy Ex. 46 does not cover the risk to the goods of hirer and therefore, the learned Judge was to that extent right in not holding the Insurance company liable for the said loss.

7. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Val sad at Navsari, on 30th January 1982 in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 159 of 1980 is modified. It is held that the appellants and respondent No. 2 New India Insurance Co. Ltd, would be jointly and/or severally liable to the extent of Rs. 3400/-to the claimant-respondent No. 1 by way of compensation with running interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of the petition i.e. 29.9.1980 till realisation. The rest of the award passed by the tribunal is confirmed. There will be no order as to costs.


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