A person travelling with goods in a goods vehicle is not covered under pre-amendment Section 147.

On 6 October 1994, Valjibhai Vakhatram was travelling in a hired goods truck with sacks of green gram when the truck overturned near village Abala on the Suigam–Bhabhar Road, causing his death.

His legal representatives filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation of ₹8,00,000.

The Tribunal partly allowed the claim, awarded ₹4,57,000 with 9% interest against opponent No. 2, and exonerated the insurer.

The claimants appealed under Section 173, challenging the insurer’s exoneration.

Whether the Tribunal was justified in exonerating the insurance company from liability for the death of a person travelling in a goods vehicle with his goods.

The Court treated the statutory provisions in force on the date of the accident as governing the insurer’s liability.

It relied on New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Asha Rani, (2003) 2 SCC 223, for the principle that, under the applicable pre-amendment insurance regime, an insurer is not liable for a person travelling in a goods vehicle merely as a passenger; the Court also referred to Section 147 of the 1988 Act and the distinction between a goods carriage and a public service vehicle.

It cited Joribhai Bhurabhai Makwana (Deceased) through His Heirs & Ors. v. Shantilal @ Satishkumar Bhogilal Damor & Ors., First Appeal No. 2542 of 2008, which applied Asha Rani to conclude that an insurer had no liability for gratuitous passengers in a goods carriage under the governing statutory regime.

The Court noted that the accident occurred on 6 October 1994 and that the deceased was travelling in a goods vehicle with his goods.

It considered the applicable statutory regime by reference to the accident date, rather than the date the claim petition was filed, rejecting the claimants’ argument that the later filing date made the 1988 Act applicable.

Applying Asha Rani and the reasoning in Joribhai, the Court held that the insurer was not liable for the deceased’s risk in the circumstances and found no basis to disturb the Tribunal’s exoneration of the insurer.

Any interim relief was vacated, and the record and proceedings were directed to be returned to the concerned court.