MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Fitness Certificate Lapse Doesn't Void Insurance Liability: Karnataka High Court Enhances Compensation in Auto Rickshaw Accident Case

14 October 2024 1:40 PM

By: sayum


Court modifies Tribunal's award, holding both owner and insurance company liable for compensation. The Karnataka High Court has ruled that the absence of a fitness certificate at the time of an accident does not absolve an insurance company of its liability. This significant judgment, delivered by Justice T.G. Shivashankare Gowda on May 28, 2024, modified the compensation awarded to the petitioner, Mallesha, and held the insurance company liable despite the vehicle's lapsed fitness certificate.

The case involved an accident on April 12, 2008, where Mallesha, a passenger in an auto rickshaw, sustained injuries due to the vehicle capsizing while avoiding a cyclist. The Tribunal had originally awarded a compensation of ₹1,44,400 but placed the liability solely on the vehicle's owner due to the lack of a valid fitness certificate at the time of the accident.

Justice Gowda enhanced the compensation to ₹2,10,500, citing the petitioner’s additional claims for pain and suffering, medical expenses, and loss of future earnings. "The lapse of a fitness certificate does not constitute a breach of the Motor Vehicles Act, and thus, the insurance company cannot be exonerated from its liability," the court stated, referencing the Full Bench decision of the Kerala High Court in V.M. Augustine vs. Ayyappankutty.

Justice Gowda remarked, "The policy of insurance was issued when the fitness certificate was valid, and the insurance company cannot avoid its liability merely because the certificate expired before the accident."

This judgment underscores that insurance companies cannot evade responsibility based on the expiration of a fitness certificate if it was valid at the time the policy was issued. The decision ensures that victims receive due compensation, emphasizing the importance of insurance coverage in providing financial relief post-accidents. The ruling is expected to influence future cases where insurance companies might attempt to disclaim liability based on technicalities regarding vehicle documentation.

Date of Decision: May 28, 2024

Mallesha vs. The Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another

Latest Legal News