Skip to main content

Insurer can't escape third party liability: Tribunal

An insurance company cannot deny compensation to the third party claimant on the grounds that the insured vehicle, involved in a road accident, was being driven by a person who did not possess a valid driving licence, a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) has ruled.

"Recovery of compensation is the statutory right of the third party applicant. The insurance company, at the most, is entitled to recover the amount of compensation from the insured but, cannot avoid its liability to pay compensation to the third party," MACT member V P Avhad ruled on February 11 while relying on a couple of judgments in 2013 by the Bombay high court and the Supreme Court.

The tribunal directed the United India Insurance Company to pay Rs 6.39 lakh compensation to the husband and two sons of a 48-year-old woman who died of injuries sustained in a road accident caused by a speeding car near HA ground in Pimpri in March 2013. The company also has to pay 7.5% p.a. interest from August 3, 2013 when the claim was filed, till realization. "Insurer is at liberty to proceed against the insured for recovery of compensation amount," the ruling stated.

Both, the car driver and the insurance company, had denied involvement of the car in the accident and had claimed that the police falsely implicated the driver on the basis of information provided by some unknown person. The car driver also claimed that he was not in a position to pay compensation. On its part, the insurance company claimed that the driver had breached the terms and conditions of the insurance policy by driving the car without valid licence and hence it was not liable to pay compensation.

Lawyer Atul B Gunjal, who appeared for the claimants, told TOI, "The evidence provided by injured witness i.e. the victim's husband, who had noted down the registration number of the offending car, and police investigation papers including the spot panchanama proved conclusive in enabling the tribunal to hold that it was a case of rash and negligent driving of the car that caused the accident."

Gunjal said, "Since the victim was a woman with no source of income from any employment, the tribunal relied on a 2010 Supreme Court verdict which held that gratuitous services of mother or wife of the applicant cannot be equated with the services of an employee. Loss of personal care and attention suffered by the husband and children cannot be measured in terms of money." The tribunal assessed a notional income of the victim at Rs 5,000 per month for calculating the overall compensation amount.

Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/Insurer-cant-escape-third-party-liability-Tribunal/articleshow/46306467.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

One Sided Clauses In Builder-Buyer Agreements Is An Unfair Trade Practice

In CIVIL APPEAL NO. 12238 OF 2018, Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. vs Govindan Raghavan, an appeal was filed before the Supreme Court  by the builder against the order of the National Consumer Forum. The builder had relied upon various clauses of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement to refute the claim of the respondent but was rejected by the commission which found the said clauses as wholly one-sided, unfair and unreasonable, and could not be relied upon. The Supreme Court on perusal of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement found stark incongruities between the remedies available to both the parties. For example, Clause 6.4 (ii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to charge Interest @18% p.a. on account of any delay in payment of installments from the Respondent – Flat Purchaser. Clause 6.4 (iii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to cancel the allotment and terminate the Agreement, if any installment remains in arrears for more than 30 da...
Post a Comment
Read more

Inherited property of childless hindu woman devolve onto heirs of her parents

In Tarabai Dagdu Nitanware vs Narayan Keru Nitanware, quashing an order passed by a joint civil judge junior division, Pune, the Bombay High Court has held that under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother, will devolve upon the heirs of her father/mother, if she dies without any children of her own, and not upon her husband. Justice Shalini Phansalkar Joshi was hearing a writ petition filed by relatives of one Sundarabai, who died issueless more than 45 years ago on June 18, 1962. Article referred:http://www.livelaw.in/property-inherited-female-hindu-parents-shall-devolve-upon-heirs-father-not-husband-dies-childless-bombay-hc-read-judgment/
Post a Comment
Read more

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more