9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are related to a motor vehicle accident compensation claim, specifically focusing on whether the deceased and injured persons were traveling as representatives of the owner of goods in a goods vehicle, and the liability of the insurance company under the Motor Vehicles Act 1988. Details of the Judgment: Issue 1: Representation of the deceased and injured persons The accident occurred when the deceased and injured were traveling in a Tata 407 vehicle as members of a marriage party. The claimants argued that they were not representatives of the owner of the goods in the vehicle. The Tribunal considered the evidence and found that the deceased and injured were not gratuitous passengers but were occupying the vehicle as representatives of the owner of the goods. The High Court failed to appreciate this aspect, leading the Supreme Court to delve into the evidence and make a determination based on the facts presented. Issue 2: Burden of proof and liability of the insurance company The appellant contended that the deceased and injured were not representatives of the owner of the goods, while the owner's counsel argued that the burden of proof regarding breach of insurance policy conditions was not met by the insurance company. The Tribunal's findings indicated that the claimants were not gratuitous passengers, and the insurance company failed to prove any violation of insurance policy terms. The Supreme Court emphasized that the insurance company was not liable based on the evidence and legal principles, citing relevant case law to support this conclusion. Conclusion: The Supreme Court set aside the impugned judgment regarding the liability of the insurance company, ruling in favor of the appellant. The Court determined that the deceased and injured were traveling as gratuitous passengers, absolving the insurance company of compensation liability. The appeal was allowed, and no costs were awarded in the case.
|
