MAST RAM vs NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.

THIS appeal is directed against the order of the learned District Forum, Bilaspur, dated 21.1.1995, whereby the complaint of the complainant/appellant has been dismissed.

THE only submission made by Mr. N.S. Chandel, learned Counsel for the appellant/ complainant is that the complainant had purchased the Truck from its original owner Shri Devinder Kumar and under Section 157 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the certificate of insurance and the policy described in the certificate shall be deemed to have been transferred in favour of the transferee i.e. the appellant/complainant with effect from the date of transfer. As such, the appellant/complainant under the terms of the insurance policy is entitled to the claim. The claim of the appellant/complainant has been disallowed by the Insurance Company on account of damage caused to the vehicle due to accident on the ground that there is no con tract of insurance between the complainant and the Insurance Company.

In this case, at the very outset, we may notice that although the possession of the vehicle has been taken over by the appellant/complain ant from the original owner Shri Devinder Kumar, but no entry to this effect has been made in the Registration Certificate. We have grave doubts whether this itself would amount to transfer. Even if we assume that this is a case of transfer, even then this will not advance the case of the appellant/complainant in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Complete lnsulations (P) Ltd. v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., I (1996) CPJ 1 (SC)=(1996) 1 SCC 221. It has been clearly held by the Supreme Court that the requirements of Chapter XI of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 are in relation to third party risk only and hence the fiction of Section 157 of the New Act must be limited thereto. It is only in respect of third party risks that Section 157 of the New Act provides that the certificate of insurance together with the policy of insurance described therein "shall be deemed to have been transferred in favour of the person to whom the motor vehicle is transferred". If the policy of insurance covers other risks as well. e.g., damage caused to the vehicle of the insured himself, that would be a matter falling outside Chapter XI of the New Act and in the realm of contract for which there must be an agreement between the insurer and the transferee, the former undertaking to cover the risk or damage to the vehicle.

IN the present case, admittedly, there was no agreement under the realm of contract between the insurer and the transferee. The respondent Assurance Company is, therefore, not liable to make good the damage caused to the vehicle. In view of what is discussed above, there is no force in this appeal and the appeal is accordingly dismissed with no orders as to costs. Appeal dismissed.