Madhya Pradesh High Court
Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. ... vs Smt. Buta Yadav on 6 December, 2023
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 6 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
MISC. APPEAL No. 488 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
THROUGH ITS MANAGER HAVING BRANCH OFFICE AT
ABOVE MRF AGENCY OPPOSITE TIWARI TOWER REWA
ROAD SATNA TEHSIL RAGHURAJNAGAR DISTRICT
SATNA PRESENT OFFICE AT 5TH FLOOR MAPLE HIGH
STREET OPPOSITE ASHIMA MALL HOSHANGABAD
ROAD BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI ADITYA NARAYAN SHARMA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. SMT. BUTA YADAV W/O RAMAYAN PRASAD
YADAV, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, VILLAGE
LALPUR (MADWA) POLICE STATION
GOVINDGARH TEHSIL HUZUR DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. RAM KRISHNA YADAV S/O BRAJBHAN YADAV,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE LALPUR
(MADWA) POLICE STATION GOVINDGARH
TEHSIL HUZUR DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. SMT. RAMKALI YADAV W/O RAM KRISHNA
YADAV, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE
LALPUR (MADWA) POLICE STATION
GOVINDGARH TEHSIL HUZUR DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. KU. MANASI YADAV D/O RAMAYAN PRASAD
YADAV, AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
THROUGH MOTHER AND GUARDIAN BUTA
YADAV W/O RAMAYAN PRASAD YADAV AGE 32
YEARS R/O VILLAGE LALPUR (MADWA) POLICE
STATION GOVINDGARH TEHSIL HUZUR DISTRICT
REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VAIBHAV
YEOLEKAR
Signing time: 07-12-2023
11:19:24
2
5. RAMANAND YADAV S/O VISHWANATH YADAV
R/O VILLAGE GUDUHARUM POST PADKHURI,
POLICE STATION AND TEHSIL RAMPUR
BAGHELAN, DISTRICT SATNA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI KAPIL PATWARDHAN - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS. 1 TO
4)
(SHRI ARPAN SHRIVASTAVA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO. 5)
This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company being aggrieved of award
dated 20th October, 2022 passed by the learned Vth Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Satna in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 400178/2014 on the ground
that deceased himself was driving the offending vehicle insured with the present
appellant.
The deceased had moved into the shoes of the owner, in as much as,
factum of relationship of owner and driver could not be proved. The owner
was maternal uncle of Driver of the vehicle.
Thus, in view of such facts, once the Driver moves into the shoes of the
owner, then in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of
Ramkhiladi and another Vs. United India Insurance Company and
another (2020) 2 SCC 550, liability of the Insurance Company will be only to
the extent of personal accident cover admissible to the Driver.
In the present case, personal accident cover was to the extent of Rs.
1,00,000/- only. Therefore, award needs to be modified.
Shri Kapil Patwardhan, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 4 after
vehemently opposing the submissions made by Shri Aditya Narayan Sharma
fairly admits that the legal proposition as laid down in the case of Ramkhiladi
(supra) necessitates that in a claim under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles
Act, claimants are entitled to only a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- from the Insurance
company. Rest of the amount, they can recover from the owner of the
offending motor vehicle.
Therefore, to that extent, the award dated 20/10/2022 is modified. It is
directed that the Insurance Company will pay a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- along
with accrued interest and Principal amount along with accrued interest will be
recoverable from the owner of the offending vehicle.
The Insurance Company will be entitled to seek refund of the amount
deposited in excess before the Tribunal and if it is already disbursed, then from
the owner of the motor vehicle.
In above terms, the appeal is allowed and disposed of.
Record of the Tribunal be sent back.
(VIVEK AGARWAL)
JUDGE
vy
