Vehicle Owner Can't File MACT Claim Against Insurance Company For Damage Caused To Own Car: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order of the Motor Vehicle Tribunal granting compensation to a car owner after observing that he had filed a claim against the insurance company in respect of damage caused to his own car which is not permitted under the Section 166 MV Act. [2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 261]The claimant, the owner of a car, alleged that due to the rashness and negligence of the driver, the claimant's car fell into a roadside canal. The lawyer preferred claim against the insurer seeking compensation for the loss he incurred. Before the Motor Vehicle Tribunal, the insurance company contended that the claimant had approached the wrong forum for compensation for his own car, and that even the insurance policy was not registered in the claimant's name, but in the name of the previous owner.The Tribunal, after hearing both parties, awarded Rs 2.2 Lakhs with interest at 6% per annum to the claimant; against this the Insurance Company moved the high court. Observing that the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to entertain the claimant's plea Justice Geetha K.B., sitting at Dharwad bench referred to Section 165 MV Act and said:"The claimant has filed the petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Tribunal, claiming compensation for damages occurred to the car against his own insurer...The plain reading of this section would indicate that the Tribunal can entertain the claim petitions filed under Section 166 only when there is third party liability in respect of damages" Section 165 of the MV Act states that State Government may constitute one or more Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals "for the purpose of adjudicating upon claims for compensation in respect of accidents involving the death of, or bodily injury to, persons arising out of the use of motor vehicles, or damages to any property of a third party so arising, or both."The court observed that the claimant was claiming compensation in respect of damages that occurred to his own car against his own insurance company. "Even though, the car in question is insured with present appellant, but the policy was standing in the name of erstwhile owner. This point need not be discussed in this case because this MACT has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition," the court held.The court further observed that the claimant is an advocate by profession, and thus he cannot say that he did not have knowledge that under Section 166 MV Act he cannot file a petition for damages to his own car against his insurance company."Hence, it cannot be said that claimant was not aware about this legal knowledge and he was prosecuting the petition before Tribunal with good faith”, the court said. The appeal was allowed and the award was set aside. Case Title: Divisional Manager, Reliance Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd. V. Sri Satish S/o Basavaraj Kurubar Case No: Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 24075 of 2013 (MV-I) Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 261 Click here to read/download the order

Vehicle Owner Can't File MACT Claim Against Insurance Company For Damage Caused To Own Car: Karnataka High Court

Sebin James

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sebin James

Vehicle Owner Can't File MACT Claim Against Insurance Company For Damage Caused To Own Car: Karnataka High Court

Sebin James

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sebin James

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers