1. Dispute regarding whether a pillion rider on a motorcycle constitutes a third party under an 'Act Only' insurance policy. (Para 2 , 3 )
Back
Next 
2022 Supreme(SC) 1819
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Hemant Gupta, Vikram Nath, JJ.
Mohana Krishnan S – Appellant
Versus
K. Balasubramaniyam & Ors. – Respondents
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 3433 of 2020
Decided On : 25-08-2022
Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Advocate, Mrs. K. Enatoli Sema, Advocate, Ms. Chubalemla Chang, Advocate, Mr. M. Gireesh Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, Advocate, Ms. Pushita Basak, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. M. Gireesh Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, Advocate, Ms. Pushita Basak, Advocate, Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Advocate, Mrs. K. Enatoli Sema, Advocate, Ms. Chubalemla Chang, Advocate, for the Respondent.
Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Advocate, Mrs. K. Enatoli Sema, Advocate, Ms. Chubalemla Chang, Advocate, Mr. M. Gireesh Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, Advocate, Ms. Pushita Basak, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. M. Gireesh Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, Advocate, Ms. Pushita Basak, Advocate, Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Advocate, Mrs. K. Enatoli Sema, Advocate, Ms. Chubalemla Chang, Advocate, for the Respondent.
Important Points
The central legal point established in the judgment is the need for authoritative determination of the interpretation of 'third party' under the Indian Motor Tariff Endorsement No. 70.
Subject
Insurance Law - Liability towards Pillion Rider
Headnote
Insurance - Pillion Rider - Indian Motor Tariff Endorsement No. 70 - 2006 (4) SCC 404, 2008 (7) 428 - The court discusses the liability of the insurance company towards the pillion rider on a motorcycle and the interpretation of 'third party' under the Indian Motor Tariff Endorsement No. 70.
Fact of the Case:
The court granted leave to consider the question of law regarding the liability of the insurance company towards the pillion rider on a motorcycle.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the question of whether the third party includes all other persons other than the insured and the insurer needs authoritative determination and thus referred the matter to a larger bench.
Issues: Interpretation of 'third party' under Indian Motor Tariff Endorsement No. 70
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the need for authoritative determination of whether all other persons who are neither the insured nor the insurer will be considered as third party and covered by the 'Act Only' policy.
Final Decision: The matter was referred to a larger bench for authoritative determination of the question of law regarding the liability of the insurance company towards the pillion rider on a motorcycle.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Contention that pillion riders are not third parties under 'Act Only' policies unless extra premium is paid per Indian Motor Tariff Endorsement No. 70. (Para 2 , 3 )
3. Court expressed prima facie reservations about excluding pillion riders from the definition of third party, stating the issue requires authoritative determination. (Para 4 )
4. Whether the term third party includes all persons other than the insured and insurer is a question of law requiring determination by a larger bench. (Para 4 )
5. Matter referred to the Chief Justice of India for the constitution of a larger bench to decide the question of law. (Para 5 )
6. Whether a pillion rider on a motorcycle is considered a third party under an 'Act Only' insurance policy?
The court expressed prima facie reservations about the view that pillion riders are not third parties and held that the question of whether third parties include all persons other than the insured and insurer must be determined authoritatively by a larger bench. (Para 4 )
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. Learned counsel for the insurance company relies upon two judgments of this Court reported as 2006 (4) SCC 404 and 2008 (7) 428 to contend that a pillion rider on a motorcycle is not a third party, therefore, the insurance company is not liable to indemnify the insured on account of the injuries or death of such pillion rider.
3. The basis of the said argument is Indian Motor Tariff Endorsement No. 70, which is to the effect that in 'Act Only' policy, the insured has to pay extra premium to cover the pillion rider.
4. However, the question as to whether the third party includes all other persons other than the insured, who is the first party and the insurer, who is the second party. Therefore, all other persons who are neither the insured nor the insurer will be third party and will be covered by the Act Only policy, we have prima facie reservation about the view expressed. Such question is required to be determined authoritatively.
5. Therefore, the Registry to place the matter before Hon'ble The Chief Justice of India to constitute a larger bench to consider the question of law as mentioned above by an appropriate Bench.
