SC: Casual Workers Can't be Denied Regularisation if Similar Daily Wagers were Regularised  ||  Supreme Court: Illegal Change of Land Use under Punjab Act Cannot be Legalised Later  ||  Allahabad High Court: Magistrate Must Consider Closure Report Even After Taking Cognizance  ||  Allahabad HC: CGST Arrest Memo Must Include Grounds as Annexure; Reasons to Believe Not Needed  ||  Kerala HC: Petitioner’s Identity Must be Verified Via SHO in Cases of Bank Account Defreezing  ||  J&K&L HC: Undenied Pleadings are Deemed Admitted by Implication under the CPC  ||  Kerala HC: Transfer Order Pending Disciplinary Proceedings Cannot be Disguised as Punishment  ||  Allahabad HC: GST, Incentives, 0r Festival Advances Cannot be Deducted From Employee’s Retiral Dues  ||  SC: Absconding Accused Cannot Claim Anticipatory Bail Solely Because a Co-Accused Was Acquitted  ||  Supreme Court: District Cricket Bodies Must Adopt Good Governance Voluntarily, Not Follow BCCI Rules    

The New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Anju and Ors. - (High Court of Bombay) (17 Jul 2023)

Insurer cannot avoid liability to pay the compensation to the victim, although insurer can seek the recovery rights from the insured, who has breached the terms of the contract

MANU/MH/2735/2023

Insurance

The Appellant/insurer (original respondent no.1) has filed present appeal impugning the judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the claim petition thereby directing the Respondent no.1 and 2 to jointly and severally pay the compensation of Rs.9,37,200 to the claimants along with the interest @ 9% p.a.

The police papers, particularly, the contents of the panchnama clearly depicts fault of the truck driver. The FIR shows that the truck driver was charged of negligence. The respondents have not controverted the material evidence against them. In that view of the matter, no fault can be found in the conclusion drawn by the Tribunal. In that view of the matter, it is difficult to accede with the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellant to consider contributory negligence of the deceased.

As held by Supreme court of India in case of Pappu and Ors. vs. Vinod Kumar Lamba, the owner of vehicle is required to plead and place material on record contending that he had appointed authorized Driver and took reasonable care to comply statutory and contractual obligation and discharge his initial burden. In that view of the matter, there is no impediment in accepting the defense of the insurer on the point of driving license. However, it is trite law that the insurer cannot avoid liability to pay the compensation to the victim of the accident although it succeeds in bringing home the defense of breach of policy as contemplated under section 149 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Resultantly, the appellant/insurer can at the most seek the recovery rights from the insured, who has breached the terms of the contract.

The submission of appellant that Tribunal awarded excessive interest on compensation amount deserves rejection, since no material placed on record of this court to show that Tribunal exercised its discretion under Section 171 of MV Act in arbitrary manner.

The Respondent nos.1 and 2 shall jointly and severally pay a sum of Rs.9,37,200 (inclusive of 'No Fault Liability') to the claimants along with the interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of the filing of the claim petition. The appeal is partly allowed.

Tags : COMPENSATION   DIRECTION   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved