- (1.) The Insurance Company is in appeal against the liability cast on the insurer for death of a person travelling on the mudguard of the vehicle. The counsel refers to me to some judgments which referred to a claim as possible if a person is seated on a mudguard. I discard all these judgments as not stating the law and they are per incuriam. I state so for the following reasons.
(2.) A tractor is not meant to carry passengers and it specifically states under Section 2(44) that it is not itself constructed to carry any load other than equipment used for the purpose of propulsion. A policy of insurance that insures the vehicle is for any damage or injury which is caused for which the policy is compulsory in terms of Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The liability for passengers (apart from "3rd parties") obtains under the scheme of Section 147 for the following class of persons: (i) passenger in a service vehicle; (ii) owner of goods travelling along with goods; (iii) loadman or persons to whom the coverage is possible under the Employees Compensation Act of 1923. Apart from the above persons, a paid driver or a conductor who have the benefit of claim arising out of and in the course of employment requiring to be covered under the Employees Compensation Act are also bound to be covered. These are the only persons who will have the benefit of claims being answered with liability cast on the insurer and for any other class of persons, they shall be drawn through specific policy coverage. After the decision of the Supreme Court in Pushpabai Purshottam Udeshi Versus Ranjit Ginning and Pressing Company, 1977 ACJ 343 IDRA circulars directed insurer to take liability for passengers in a private car also, if a comprehensive policy is taken. An extra premium that can cover the risk to a passenger in a private vehicle cannot extend to a person who is unauthorized.
(3.) Courts have always recognized certain classes of persons as not leaving a trail of claim payable against the insurer. They are: (i) gratuitous passengers in a goods vehicle New India Assurance Company Limited Versus Asha Rani, 2003 2 SCC 223; (ii) passengers for hire or reward in goods carriages National Insurance Company Limited Versus Baljit Kaur and others, 2004 2 SCC 1 ; (iii) in respect of two wheelers, a borrower from an owner of a vehicle Ningamma and another Versus United India Insurance Company Limited, 2009 13 SCC 710. This court itself had occasions to deal with the untenability of claims arising on account of persons sitting on mudguard of the tractor making claims for compensation. United India Insurance Company Limited Versus Santra Devi, 2010 160 PunLR 432 ; United India Insurance Company Versus Ramji Lal, 2010 160 PunLR 436 ; and Krishan Versus Tarawati widow and others, 2011 163 PunLR 29 . The claim for compensation is, therefore, untenable and the Tribunal ought to have dismissed it.;