"Party Autonomy is the Backbone of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment Despite Party’s Attempts to Frustrate Arbitration Proceedings    |     Reasonable Doubt Arising from Sole Testimony in Absence of Corroboration, Power Cut Compounded Identification Difficulties: Supreme Court Acquits Appellants in Murder Case    |     ED Can Investigate Without FIRs: PH High Court Affirms PMLA’s Broad Powers    |     Accident Claim | Contributory Negligence Cannot Be Vicariously Attributed to Passengers: Supreme Court    |     Default Bail | Indefeasible Right to Bail Prevails: Allahabad High Court Faults Special Judge for Delayed Extension of Investigation    |     “Habitual Offenders Cannot Satisfy Bail Conditions Under NDPS Act”: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to Accused with Extensive Criminal Record    |     Delhi High Court Denies Substitution for Son Due to 'Gross Unexplained Delay' of Over Six Years in Trademark Suit    |     Section 4B of the Tenancy Act Cannot Override Land Exemptions for Public Development: Bombay High Court    |     Suspicion, However High, Is Not a Substitute for Proof: Calcutta High Court Orders Reinstatement of Coast Guard Officer Dismissed on Suspicion of Forgery    |     Age Not Conclusively Proven, Prosecutrix Found to be a Consenting Party: Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Accused in POCSO Case    |     'Company's Absence in Prosecution Renders Case Void': Himachal High Court Quashes Complaint Against Pharma Directors    |     Preventive Detention Cannot Sacrifice Personal Liberty on Mere Allegations: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention of Local Journalist    |     J.J. Act | Accused's Age at Offense Critical - Juvenility Must Be Addressed: Kerala High Court Directs Special Court to Reframe Charges in POCSO Case    |     Foreign Laws Must Be Proved Like Facts: Delhi HC Grants Bail in Cryptocurrency Money Laundering Case    |    

In Motor Vehicle Accident Claims, the Insurance Company Must Pay the Award Amount First and Then Recover from the Vehicle Owner and Driver: Madhya Pradesh High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


 

In a significant judgment concerning motor vehicle accident claims, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur, presided over by Hon'ble Shri Justice Amar Nath, has ruled on the contentious issue of the liability of insurance companies in accident claims. The court dealt with the appeals in Miscellaneous Appeal No.3096 of 2013 and No.2962 of 2013, involving appellants Smt. Prembai, Chammo Bai, and respondents Doulaltram, Ranjeet Singh, The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

The case originated from a tragic accident on June 10, 2011, causing the death of Mangilal. His wife and daughter sought a compensation claim of Rs. 33,25,000. However, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 4,87,000 with an interest of 7.5% per annum, instructing the insurance company to pay this amount and then recover it from the vehicle owner and driver.

Legal Point: The primary legal issue revolved around the enhancement of compensation and the liability of the insurance company in case of policy breaches, such as the driver not possessing a valid license.

Enhanced Compensation: The Court, acknowledging the appellants' plea, enhanced the compensation by Rs. 80,000, citing the need for additional amounts under the heads of loss of spousal and parental consortium.

Insurance Company's Liability: Despite the insurance company's contention that the driver had an invalid license at the accident's time, the Court upheld the Tribunal's direction. It relied on precedents set by the Apex Court, emphasizing that insurance companies are initially liable to pay compensation. They can later recover the amount from the vehicle owner and driver. The judgment referenced several landmark decisions, including New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Kusum & Others and National Insurance Company Vs. Swarn Singh.

Pay and Recovery Order: The Court maintained that the insurance company must pay the enhanced compensation within 60 days, with 6% interest from the claim's filing date. The right to recover this amount from the vehicle's owner and driver was affirmed.

Decision: The appeal for enhanced compensation by the claimants was allowed, and the insurance company's appeal was dismissed. The company is directed to comply with the payment order, following which they are entitled to recover the amount from the vehicle owner and driver.

Date of Decision: 1st April 2024

Smt. Prembai & Anr. Vs. Doulaltram & Ors.

 

Similar News