Motor Vehicle Accident | Policy Holder's Family Members Not Protected In Third Party Insurance Claims: Andhra Pradesh High Court

Factual Matrix

The claimant was engaged as a cleaner of a lorry and due to rash driving by the lorry driver, it met with an accident and the petitioner sustained severe injuries. The petitioner filed a claim petition for compensation and costs under the Motor Vehicle Act against the owner and insurer of offending vehicle.

The Tribunal allowed part compensation to be paid by the owner of the offending vehicle and the claim petition against the Insurance company was dismissed. Being aggrieved by the award, the claimant preferred the instant appeal.

The petitioner confined his arguments in appeal only on the legal issue, whether exoneration of the Insurance company from payment of compensation to the claimant is legally sustainable or not?

Observation of the Court

From the proceedings before the Tribunal, it was seen that the petitioner is the son of the owner of the lorry. Moreover, the insurance policy shows that the risk of only third party is covered and son of the owner cannot be brought under the ambit of ‘third party.’ The Insurance company relied on the decision of Supreme Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Sadanand Mukhi (2009) “where the claimant is not third party in relation to Insurance company, the liability of the Insurance company to compensate the said claimant does not arise”.

In another Apex Court decision in United India Insurance Company Limited v. Om Prakash (2010), it was 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”.

Therefore, since the petitioner was the son of the owner of vehicle, he cannot be considered as a third party and, thus, the Insurance company cannot be fastened the liability, Court held. It is the owner of the offending vehicle alone who is liable to compensate the claimant for loss due to accident, it added.

The appeal was dismissed for being devoid of merits and the order of Tribunal was conformed.

Cause Title: Bandarla Naveen Kumar v. Balaji Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd & Anr.