- (1.) The aforesaid sets of appeals were listed under category two out of the three categories. The arguments were heard, compositively for all the three categories. We have delivered judgment today for category one and three, while we are passing this order for the appeals falling under category two. The appeals falling under first category were those which fell under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'old Act'). The appeals falling under second category are those which falls under Motor Vehicles Act 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'new Act') , prior to its 1994 amendment, while the appeals falling under category three were those falling under the new Act but those after the 1994 amendment.
(2.) Learned counsel for the insurance company submits that in New India Assurance company v. Satpal Singh and Ors. this Court held that insurance company is liable to pay compensation in all cases where the deceased or injured persons are gratuitous passengers including owner or his representative of the goods while travelling in a goods carriage under section 147 of the new Act. He seeks reference of this point to a larger Bench as it vitally affects Insurance Company and as relevant provisions of the new Act were not placed before this Court and if it were placed, a different conclusion would have come.
(3.) This Court in Satpal Singh (supra) held: "The result is that under the new Act an insurance policy covering third-party risk is not required to exclude gratuitous passengers in a vehicle, no matter that the vehicle is of any type or class. Hence the decisions rendered under the old Act vis-a-vis gratuitous passengers are of no avail while considering the liability of the insurance company in respect of any accident which occurred or would occur after the new Act came into force. ";