Summary
Compensation for a death caused by a privately owned bus hired by UPSRTC was directed to be paid by the insurer. Kailash Nath Kothari did not justify fastening the whole award solely on the Corporation: that case involved the earlier statutory definition and an insurer that had already paid its limited liability. Kulsum governed the insured hired-bus situation. The contractual allocation between bus owner and Corporation did not bind the victim.
Issues
- Whether hiring and operational control of the insured bus relieved the insurer of compensation liability.
- Whether the agreement between owner and Corporation determined the victim’s rights.
Provisions considered
- Section 2(30), Motor Vehicles Act, 1988The changed statutory definition formed part of the basis for applying Kulsum rather than the earlier-Act decision. (¶ 5)
Held
- Kailash Nath Kothari was distinguishable: the insurer had paid the limited Rs.75,000 liability in that earlier-Act case, leaving the excess to the Corporation. It did not support complete exclusion of insurer liability here. (¶¶ 4, 5)
- Kulsum governed this case of an insured bus operated under a hiring agreement. The insurer could not escape the third-party compensation liability merely because the Corporation exercised operational control. (¶¶ 5, 6)
- Clause 10 allocating liability between Corporation and owner bound those parties, and not outsiders, particularly the victim. It did not control the claimant’s statutory entitlement. (¶ 6)
- The award was payable only by the insurer, with the stated interest, within three months. (¶ 7)
Result
Appeal allowed; insurer directed to pay the MACT award with interest at the stated rate within three months.