JUDGMENT
1. Heard counsel for the appellant.
2.
This appeal is from the award dated August 28, 1997, passed in the Motor Accidents Claim No. 600 of 1993. The facts giving rise to this appeal are that Chandra Shekhar Pant was posted as Divisional Logging Manager in the Forest Corporation in Kaladungi, District Nainital. On July 4, 1993, at about 10 a.m. while he was travelling in Jeep No. U.P.32/4302, the jeep met an accident in which he died. The other occupants of the jeep, namely, driver and Dak-runner received injuries but they survived. A claim petition was filed by the claimant/respondents for payment of compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to “the Act”). After hearing the parties, the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 4,15,019 payable by the appellant, aggrieved by which this appeal has been filed.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant has assailed the award on the ground that in view of the condition “a” in Section 2 of the policy, as the late Shri Chandra Shekhar Pant died in the course of employment, the appellant-company is not liable to pay the compensation. This contention was raised before the Tribunal also but it has been repelled on the ground that the deceased was the insured person and he was also the occupant of the jeep and hence the liability is of the appellant to pay the compensation. For convenience, the condition of the policy which has been relied on by learned counsel for the appellant is being reproduced below :
“Death of, or bodily injury to, any person including occupants carried in the motor car (provided such occupants are not carried for hire or reward) but except so far as is necessary to meet the requirement of the Motor Vehicles Act, the company shall not be liable where such death or injury arises out of and in the course of the employment of such person by the insured.”
4. A close reading of the clause shows that the appellant-company has to indemnify the loss or damages caused by the death, bodily injury on a person including the occupants carried in the motor car. It is not disputed that the jeep was covered by the insurance policy at the relevant time. The only qualification of the aforesaid condition is that the occupants may not be carried for hire or reward. The latter part of the condition is that with regard to the death or bodily injury caused to any person while in the course of employment of the person insured, the company shall not be liable to pay compensation. In the policy filed as annexure 2 to the affidavit filed in support of the stay application the name of the insured and address mentioned shown is Divisional Logging Manager. Thus, from the policy itself it is clear that the deceased, Chandra Shekhar Pant, was
the insured person and he could not fall in any of the categories of persons mentioned in the above condition.
5. In our opinion, the view taken by the Tribunal does not suffer from any illegality. The appeal has no force and is accordingly dismissed in limine. The amount deposited in this court shall be remitted to the Tribunal for being paid to claimants.
6. A certified copy of this order shall be supplied to learned counsel for the appellant on payment of usual charges within two days.