High Court of Delhi was dealing with the petition challenging award dated 27.11.2021 to the limited extent that it grants recovery rights against the driver of the vehicle.
Brief Facts:
On 28.01.2015 the deceased was going to Pocket-1, Narela, Delhi on a scooty and when he reached near Pocket 13, Narela, Shahpur Road, Narela, Delhi the offending Eeco Car being driven in a rash and negligent manner by one Sh. Niraj came and hit the scooty of the decease with great force. As a result of the forceful impact deceased fell down and sustained fatal injuries. The tribunal has found that the offending vehicle was stolen by Niraj and a complaint was already lodged with Police Station with regard to the theft of the offending vehicle. The vehicle was insured with the appellant.
Appellant’s Contentions:
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that since the vehicle was stolen and driver was a professional thief there was no liability on the insurance company to pay the amount.
HC’s Observations:
The question that comes before the Court was whether the insurance company is absolved of the liability to pay the amount in a case where the vehicle is stolen and unauthorisedly being driven by somebody else.
HC relied upon the case of United India Insurance Company vs. Lehru and Ors, where SC held that “in order to avoid the liability, the insurer must establish that there was a willful breach on the part of the insured.” HC observed that in the present case the insurance company has not been able to show any breach on the part of the insured to avoid its liability.
HC also relied upon the judgment of High Court of Karnataka in Sri Sathish Kini vs. Smt. Jnaneshwari M.H.Nutan wherein, the Court held that “the judgment in Lehru is complete answer to the contention of the insurance company and the insurance company may have a claim for contribution from the driver.”
HC Held:
After evaluating submissions made by both the parties the Court held that “if the proposition of the insurance company was accepted, it would militate against the very concept of a beneficial legislation for the victims of an accident. If such a finding were to be returned then the effect would be that even though a vehicle is insured but is stolen, not only would the insurance company be entitled to avoid its liability but the owner of the vehicle who has insured his vehicle against theft and accident would be saddled with a liability for no fault of his. Alternatively, the claimants would be left without any remedy to seek compensation. In the instant case, Tribunal has found that the vehicle was stolen and there was no willful breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy by the insured.”
HC found no infirmity in impugned award.
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva
Case Title: United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Anita Devi And Ors.
Case Details: MAC.APP. 15/2022 & CM APPL. 2953-54/2022
Picture Source :
