& Ors. Vs. Basavaraj & ANR.  INSC 1279 (24 July 2009)
APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4773 OF 2009 [Arising out of SLP(C) No.
3370/2003] SUSHEELABAI AND ORS. ... APPELLANT(S) :VERSUS:
Revanayya died in an accident which took place on 11.9.1995. He, admittedly,
was shown as the owner of the tractor which was the vehicle involved in the
accident. Indisputably, the insurance policy was taken in the name of the
deceased as also in the name of one Basavaraj. The Insurance policy was an Act
policy, meaning thereby the insured had a third party liability only.
petition was filed by the appellants herein claiming compensation for the death
of the said Revanayya, on the premise that he was not the owner of the vehicle
but was merely one of the labourers. The said plea of the appellant had been
rejected by both the Courts below.
Raja Venkatappa Naik, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants
would contend that the learned Tribunal as also the High Court committed a
serious error in passing the impugned judgment in so far as they failed to take
into consideration the salient features of this case, namely, (i) the policy of
insurance was in two names, (ii) the deed of partition in terms whereof the
tractor in question fell in the share of brother the deceased (iii) oral
evidences adduced on behalf of the parties that he was merely a coolie in the
tractor and not the owner thereof.
from the fact that the concurrent finding of fact has been arrived at by the
Tribunal as also the High Court, another circumstance which must be taken note
of by us is that at a later date, the tractor was transferred in the name of
appellant No.1 - the wife of the deceased. Furthermore, in any event, the
tractor being a vehicle with one seat, nobody else apart from the driver
thereof could travel in the tractor.
aspect of the matter has been considered recently by this Court in Dhanraj vs. New
India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Anr., 2004 (8) SCC 553.
the reasons aforementioned, there is no merit in this appeal which is dismissed
accordingly. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall
be no order as to costs.
.......................J (S.B. SINHA)
.......................J (DEEPAK VERMA)
JULY 24, 2009.
Pages: 1 2 3