Oriental
Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sony Cheriyan [1999] INSC 283 (19 August 1999)
S.Saghir
Ahmad, R.P.Sethi S. SAGHIR AHMAD, J.
Respondent's
truck was insured with the appellant. On 19.4.1994, while the truck was on its
way from Bombay to Allapuzha carrying 15 barrels of Ether Solvent, it caught
fire at Bisalkoppa near Hubli, which gave rise to a Claim Petition being filed
by the respondent before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Allapuzha,
in the sum of Rs.2,75,000/-, along with interest @ 18 per cent per annum from
19.4.1994, but the Complaint was dismissed on 30.9.1995. An appeal, which was
thereafter filed by the respondent before the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission, was allowed on 24.4.1996 directing the appellant to pay a sum of
Rs.1,93,500/- together with interest @ 12 per cent from 19.4.1994 to the
respondent. A Revision filed by the appellant before the National Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission was dismissed on 10.2.1997 and now the matter is
in appeal before this Court.
The
claim of the respondent was resisted by the appellant before the District
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum on the ground, inter alia, that the claim was
not covered by the terms of the insurance policy as the respondent, in his
vehicle, was carrying Ethyl Ether, a hazardous and highly inflammable
substance, which could not be legally carried by the respondent in his truck in
terms of the permit granted to him under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It was
precisely on this ground that the District Forum had rejected the claim which,
as mentioned above, was allowed by the State Commission. The National Commission
before which it was argued that the Ether Solvent and Ethyl Ether were the same
substance, dismissed the Revision on the ground that what was prohibited under
the Central Motor Vehicle Rules was Ethyl Ether and that there was no material
on record to indicate that Ethyl Ether was the same substance as Ether Solvent.
The
insurance policy issued to the respondent in respect of his Mahindra Alwin
Nisan Truck No. KL-04 A 4683, which was registered as a public carrier, clearly
stipulated under the heading "LIMITATION AS TO USE" as under :
"Only
for carriage of goods within the meaning of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988."
Section 2 (13) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the `Act' for short) defines
"goods" as under :
"
'Goods' includes live-stock, and anything, (other than equipment ordinarily
used with the vehicle) carried by a vehicle except living persons, but does not
include luggage or personal effects carried in a motor car or in a trailer
attached to a motor car or the personal luggage of passengers travelling in the
vehicle." Section 2 (14) defines "goods carriage" as under :
"
'Goods carriage' means any motor vehicle constructed or adapted for use solely
for the carriage of goods, or any motor vehicle not so constructed or adapted
when used for the carriage of goods." "Permit" is defined in
Section 2(31) as under:
"
'Permit' means a permit issued by a State or Regional Transport Authority or an
authority prescribed in this behalf under this Act authorising the use of a
motor vehicle as a transport vehicle." This definition stipulates that a
motor vehicle cannot be used as a transport vehicle unless a permit is issued
either by the State Transport Authority or the Regional Transport Authority or
any other Authority prescribed in that behalf under the Act.
Chapter
5 of the Act deals with control of transport vehicles. Section 66 (1), together
with the third proviso which is relevant for this case, lays down as under :
"66.
Necessity for permit -- (1) No owner of a motor vehicle shall use or permit the
use of the vehicle as a transport vehicle in any public place whether or not
such vehicle is actually carrying any passengers or goods save in accordance
with the conditions of a permit granted or countersigned by a Regional or State
Transport Authority or any prescribed authority authorising him the use of the
vehicle in that place in the manner in which the vehicle is being used:
Provided
that...................
Provided
further that...........
Provided
also that a goods carriage permit shall, subject to any conditions that may be
specified in the permit, authorise the holder to use the vehicle for the
carriage of goods for or in connection with a trade or business carried on by
him." Section 77 contemplates that an application for a 'permit' to use a
motor vehicle for the carriage of goods shall contain, amongst other
particular, the nature of goods it is proposed to carry.
Section
78 provides that a Regional Transport Authority, while considering an
application for a 'goods carrier permit', shall have regard to the matters,
namely:
"(a)
the nature of the goods to be carried with special reference to their dangerous
or hazardous nature to human life;
(b) the
nature of the chemicals or explosives to be carried with special reference to
the safety to human life." Section 79 provides that a Regional Transport
Authority may grant a 'goods carrier permit' and may attach to the 'permit' any
one or more of the conditions specified in sub-section (2) thereof. The
relevant portion of sub-section (2) is reproduced below:
"(2)
The Regional Transport Authority, if it decides to grant a goods carriage
permit, may grant the permit and may, subject to any rules that may be made
under this Act, attach to the permit any one or more of the following
conditions, namely :
(i)
....................... (ii) ....................... (iii) that goods of a
specified nature shall not be carried. (iv) .......................
(v)
....................... (vi) .......................
(vii)
....................... (viii).......................
(ix)
......................." The respondent, under the 'permit' granted to him
could, admittedly, carry "All kinds of unhazardous goods, including fish,
except those prohibited." Chapter V of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989
deals with construction, equipment and maintenance of motor vehicles. Rule
91(c) defines "dangerous or hazardous goods" as under :
"
`dangerous or hazardous goods' means the goods of dangerous or hazardous nature
to human life specified in Tables I, II and III to Rule 137." Rule 129
deals with transportation of goods of dangerous or hazardous nature to human
life.
Table
I to Rule 137 contains the labels which have to be displayed on the vehicle in
relation to the dangerous or hazardous goods carried by them. Table II
describes indicative criteria in respect of flammable chemicals. The following
is the criteria:
"(b)
Flammable chemicals :
(i)
flammable gases: chemicals which in the gaseous state at normal pressure and
mixed with air become flammable and the boiling point of which at normal
pressure is 20 Degree C or below;
(ii) highly
flammable liquids: chemicals which have a flash point lower than 21 Degree C
and the boiling point of which at normal pressure is above 20 Degree C;
(iii) flammable
liquids: chemicals which have a flash point lower than 55 Degree C and which
remain liquids under pressure, where particular processing conditions, such as
high pressure and high temperature, may create major accident hazards.
Table
III contains the list of hazardous and toxic chemicals. One of the items
described in this Table is 'Ethyl Ether' which is classified as flammable in
the same Table.
Admittedly,
respondent was carrying Ether Solvent which has been described as a hazardous
and highly flammable article. Since under the 'permit' granted to the
respondent he could transport only non-hazardous articles, and the insurance
policy covered only those goods which were permissible under the Motor Vehicles
Act to be carried by the respondent, the judgments dated 24.4.1996 and
10.2.1997 passed by the State and National Commissions respectively, are
incorrect.
The
insurance policy between the insurer and the insured represents a contract
between the parties. Since the insurer undertakes to compensate the loss
suffered by the insured on account of risks covered by the insurance policy,
the terms of the agreement have to be strictly construed to determine the
extent of liability of the insurer. The insured cannot claim anything more than
what is covered by the insurance policy. That being so, the insured has also to
act strictly in accordance with the statutory limitations or terms of the
policy expressly set out therein.
In the
instant case, while specifying the "LIMITATIONS AS TO USE", it was
clearly mentioned that the policy was meant to cover only carriage of goods as
defined within the meaning of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The `permit' granted to
the respondent under the Act specifies the nature of goods which he could carry
on the vehicle. It was provided in the `permit' itself that the respondent
could carry "all kinds of unhazardous goods including fish except those
prohibited." It is obvious that the `permit' was not granted for carrying
hazardous goods. It has already been specified above that Ether which was being
transported by the respondent in his vehicle is hazardous substance indicated
in Table III under Rule 137. There was, therefore, a specific prohibition
operating against the respondent from carrying a hazardous, and that too,
flammable substance in his vehicle which, under the `permit' granted to him,
could be utilised only for carrying unhazardous goods under the Motor Vehicles
Act.
Mr.
T.L. Vishwanatha Iyer, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondent has contended that what was being carried by the respondent was
ETHER SOLVENT which is not specified in Table III appended to Rule 137 and what
is specified therein is ETHYL ETHER which is a different substance altogether
and, therefore, carrying of ETHER SOLVENT was not and it could not be treated
to be a hazardous substance as it was not specified as such in Table III.
We are
not prepared to accept this contention. Ether is a chemical substance. In
Hawley's Condensed Chemical Dictionary, Eleventh Edition, `Ether' is described
as under :
"ether
- A class of organic compounds in which an oxygen atom is interposed between
two carbon atoms (organic groups) in the molecular structure giving the generic
formula ROR. They may be derived from alcohols by elimination of water, but the
major method is catalytic hydration of olefins. Only the lowest member of the
series, methyl ether, is gaseous; most are liquid and the highest members are
solid (cellulose ethers). The term "ether" is often used synonymously
with "ethyl ether" and is the legal label name for it." In Mcgraw-Hill
Encyclopedia of Chemistry, Second Edition, it is described that
"Ethers" are used widely as solvents, both in chemical manufacture
and in the research laboratory. It is also mentioned therein that the most
important Ether is Ethyl Ether. While describing Ethyl Ether, it is mentioned
in this Encylopedia as under :
"The
best known of the ethers is ethyl ether, sometimes, called diethyl ether or
simply ether, CH3 CH2 OCH2 CH3. It is used in industry as a solvent and in
medicine as an anesthetic." In view of the above, it is apparent that
Ether Solvent is only a descriptive name for Ether which is widely used as a
solvent not only in the industry, but also in chemical manufacture and in
research laboratories. Ether and Ethyl Ether are the same substance and the
term "Ether" is used synonymously with the "Ethyl Ether".
In
view of the above, the appeal is allowed. The judgment and orders dated
24.4.1996 and 10.2.1997 passed by the State and National Commissions
respectively are set aside, while the judgment dated 30.9.1995 passed by the
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Alappuzha, is restored by which the
Complaint (the Claim Petition of the respondent) was rightly dismissed. There
will be no order as to costs.
Back