IMPORTANT POINT
Where a private car was being driven by husband of insured when vehicle met with accident, personal accident claim could not be defeated that he was not a passenger.

V.K. Patil, Member—This appeal under Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act,1986 has been filed by the appellant having been aggrieved by the order dated 18.2.2008 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter referred as “District Forum” in short) under Case No. 26/2007.

2. The brief facts of the case are that Shri Raj Kumar Hirani had insured his vehicle Maruti 800 Registration No. CG-04/ZD-3776 under Comprehensive Insurance which is now called Private Car Policy-B Package, for period from 26.12.2004 to 25.12.2005 bearing policy No. 450301/31/04/06478. The vehicle met with accident at night on 7.11.2005. Shri Ram Ahuja was driving the vehicle at the time of accident. FIR was lodged with police in nearby Thana Dharsiwa. Shri Ram Ahuja was hospitalized and died on 17.11.2005. The complainant Smt. Sapna Ahuja filed complaint with the District Forum Raipur alleging that the OP insurance company did not make payment of personal accident cover Rs.1,00,000 despite giving intimation, thus committed deficiency in service. OP Insurance company averred in their reply that the husband of the complainant Mr. Ram Ahuja, driving the insured vehicle at the time of accident, was not covered under the insurance policy, in question, since he was neither the owner of the vehicle nor passenger travelling other than owner driver. Therefore personal accident claim to the complainant was not payable and no deficiency in service committed. District Forum having considered the documents produced and heard arguments of both parties did not find ground to allow the prayer of the complainant, hence dismissed.

3. The appellant/complainant averred in appeal that District Forum had not examined the documents and affidavit of both parties properly. The conclusion of District Forum that Late Ram Ahuja, was not in the category of ‘passenger’ certainly not correct. The interpretation of owner driver by the District Forum was done incorrectly. It was also averred that District Forum has not examined the provisions of Indian Motor Tariff and also findings of cited cases, hence appeal preferred.

4. The respondent insurance company in their written arguments dated 10.9.2008 averred that there was no dispute about the vehicle in question having been insured by them. In para 2 of their reply the respondent insurance company has made adequate efforts to explain the term ‘Drive’ and also the difference between the driver and passenger therefore the contention of appellant that any person travelling would be called ‘passenger’ is not tenable. In Para 3 of arguments the insurance company has mentioned provisions of (Section 16 together with Section 15 and 17) of Indian Motor Tariff, “personal accident cover to the insured or any named person other than Driver or cleaner”. It is further added that as per provisions, any named person could be insured other than paid driver by paying extra premium. Further provisions of Indian Motor Tariff 16 have been mentioned by the appellant in support of their plea to deny claim. Also by way of provisions of Indian Motor Tariff 17, the liability of paid driver is mentioned which does not apply to the claim in question. The case laws cited by the respondents were as under:

(1) Virendra Singh v. New India Assurance Co. Limited.1

It had different matter whereby it was held, “An owner cannot at one moment become ‘driver’ and another moment an ‘owner’”.The Insurance Company was not held liable.

(2) Ramashre Singh v. New India Assurance Co. Limited.2

In that case premiums were paid for 13 passengers + 1 driver. The insurer was held not liable for the death of Khalasi who was not engaged in driving and no premium was paid for Khalasi. Claim of owner was held riot sustainable.

(3) Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh— Manjit Kaur & Others v. The Oriental Insurance Co. Limited.3

In that case the appellant was owner of car and her husband while driving car died of accident. T