The Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissed an appeal filed for claiming compensation from the Insurance Company and held that since the petitioner was the son of the owner of the vehicle, he cannot be considered a third party and, thus, the Insurance company cannot be held liable and it is the owner of the offending vehicle alone who is liable to compensate the claimant for loss due to accident.
Brief Facts:
The claimant met with an accident due to rash driving by the lorry driver and the petitioner sustained severe injuries. The petitioner then filed a claim petition under Section 166(1) for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act wherein the tribunal allowed part compensation to be paid by the owner of the offending vehicle and the claim against the insurance company was dismissed. The petitioner then filed the present petition challenging the order of the tribunal.
Contentions of the Applicant:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner confined his arguments only to the aspect of exoneration of the Insurance Company from payment of compensation to the claimant.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents relied on the judgement in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sadanand Mukhi where it was held that “where the claimant is not a third party in relation to Insurance company, the liability of the Insurance company to compensate the said claimant does not arise”.
Observations of the Court:
The court observed that the petitioner in the present case was the son of the owner of the lorry and further that the insurance policy shows that the risk of only a third party is covered and the son of the owner cannot be brought under the ambit of ‘third party.’
The court further referred to the judgement in United India Insurance vs. Om Prakash which held that “the claimants in all the three original petitions are not third parties either under the Act or under the terms and conditions of the policy and the Tribunal below has no jurisdiction to entertain the claim petitions filed by them and the appellant Insurance company is not liable to pay compensation to the claimants”.
The court further stated that since the petitioner was the son of the owner of the vehicle, he cannot be considered a third party and, thus, the Insurance company cannot be held liable and it is the owner of the offending vehicle alone who is liable to compensate the claimant for loss due to accident.
The decision of the Court:
The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the impugned order.
Case Title: Bandarla Naveen Kumar v. Balaji Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd & Anr.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice V. Gopala Krishna Rao
Case No.: M.A.C.M.A. No. 1759 of 2012
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
