- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Jharkhand High Court
- /
- Legal Heirs Of Deceased Driver...
Legal Heirs Of Deceased Driver Entitled To Compensation Under Personal Accident Cover Even If Driver Was At Fault: Jharkhand High Court
Bhavya Singh
5 Feb 2025 11:30 AM IST
The Jharkhand High Court has held that the legal heirs of a deceased driver are entitled to compensation under the personal accident (PA) cover of an insurance policy, even when the driver himself was at fault for the accident. The court ruled that a driver in such circumstances enters “into the shoes of the owner” and is eligible for compensation as per the PA coverage of the...
The Jharkhand High Court has held that the legal heirs of a deceased driver are entitled to compensation under the personal accident (PA) cover of an insurance policy, even when the driver himself was at fault for the accident.
The court ruled that a driver in such circumstances enters “into the shoes of the owner” and is eligible for compensation as per the PA coverage of the insurance policy.
Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, presiding over the case, observed, “The insurance policy is available on record, wherein PA cover under Section-III for owner-driver (CSI) is said to be Rs. 2 lakhs, meaning thereby that insurance is there. It is not clear from that if only the owner is driving the vehicle, then only that clause will apply. It is in the form of owner-driver, meaning thereby, whoever is driving the vehicle, is entitled for and PA cover is there of Rs. 2 lakhs and if such a situation is there, certainly the deceased entered into the shoes of the owner.”
The court clarified in its order that as per the terms of the insurance policy, PA cover is not restricted only to the owner but also extends to anybody who is driving the insured vehicle during the time of the accident.
Background
The above ruling came in an appeal preferred by the 8 residents of the Dandila Kala village in the Palamau district of Jharkhand being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the award passed by the Principal District Judge-cum-Motar Accident Claims Tribunal in an M.A.C.C. Case whereby the Tribunal had dismissed the compensation claim of the appellants.
The case arose from the death of Asmuddin Ansari, who was employed as a truck driver and met with an accident while driving the insured vehicle. The accident occurred when he lost control of the truck and crashed into a tree. Following the accident, an FIR was registered under Sections 279, 304(A), and 427 of the Indian Penal Code, and a charge sheet was filed against the deceased, indicating that he was at fault for the accident.
The Counsel appearing on behalf of the insurance company opposed the claim, arguing that the compensation case was claimed under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicle Act and since the negligence was on the part of the deceased, the Tribunal rightly passed the said award. He further submitted that if such a situation was there, no case of interference by the Court was made out.
However, the High Court found that, “In the order of the learned Tribunal, it has not come how the vehicle was being driven rashly and negligently by the deceased. It is an admitted position that the legal heirs and successors of the deceased have claimed the compensation under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicle Act and they have only stated that the deceased lost the control over the vehicle. Loss may occur due to failure of break or any break down in the vehicle, thus it cannot be said that the deceased was driving the vehicle negligently and rashly.”
Accordingly, the High Court modified the tribunal's order and directed the insurance company to pay Rs. 2 lakhs to the appellants along with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of application.
The court concluded its judgement while directing, “In view of the above judgment, the appellants are entitled for a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs with the statutory interest @ 7.5 percent per annum from the date of application. As such, the insurance company is directed to pay Rs. 2 lakhs along with interest @ 7.5 percent per annum to the appellants from the date of application within eight weeks from today.”
Case Title: Kuraisa Bibi and Ors vs Pushpa Devi and Ors
LL Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Jha) 14