TMI Blog1995 (2) TMI 434X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant-company and respondent No. 4 to cover unlimited liability in respect of an accident to a passenger. In the absence of such an express agreement, the policy covers only the statutory liability. The mere fact that the insurance policy is a comprehensive policy will not help the respondents in any manner. It does not mean that the limit of liability with regard to third party risk becomes unlimited or higher than the statutory liability. For this purpose, a specific agreement is necessary which is absent in the present case.The appellant-company is, therefore, entitled to succeed to the extent that it has been directed to pay to respondents 1 to 3 any amount in excess of ₹ 15,000/-. The, appeal is, therefore, allowed to this exten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... est at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the presentation of the petition and directed the appellant and respondents 4 and 5 to pay the same. 4. Being aggrieved by this order, the appellant filed Misc. Appeal No. 444 of 1991 before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh. The High Court, by its order dated 11th February, 1994, dismissed the appeal of the appellant and confirmed the findings of the Tribunal. The present appeal arises from this order of the Madhya Pradesh. 5. The short question that we have to consider is whether the appellant is liable to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,10,000/- together with interest thereon at the rate of 12% from the date of the presentation of the petition to respondents 1 to 3. The appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n (1), a policy of insurance shall cover any liability incurred in respect of any one accident tip to the following limits, namely - (a) x x x x (b) Where the vehicle is a vehicle in which passengers are carried for hire or reward or by reason of or in pursuance of a contract of employment. (i) in respect of persons other than passengers carried for hire or reward, a limit of fifty thousand rupees in all; (ii) in respect of passengers, a limit of fifteen thousand rupees for each individual passenger; There were the provisions at the relevant time, These provisions were interpreted by this Court in the case of National Insurance Co.Ltd., New Delhi v. Jugal Kishore Ors. (1988 (1) SCC 626). This Court observed that even though i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntract to cover unlimited liability in respect of passengers between the appellant-company and respondent No. 4. The Tribunal as well as the High Court seem to have proceeded on the basis that the appellant-company had charged an extra premium of 0.50 paise per passenger to cover the risk of unlimited liability towards passengers. This seems to be an error. The premium of Rs. 600/- has been paid in respect of 50 passengers. The policy clearly shows this. It is not 0.50 paise per passenger. It is pointed out by the appellant-company with reference to its tariff in respect of Legal Liability for Accidents to Passengers that if the limit of liability for any one passenger is fifteen thousand rupees, the rate -of annual premium per passeng ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
