SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

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.

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.

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.

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.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top