Hon'ble TOTLA, J.—In an accident occurring on 27.0.7.06 Car No. RJ 27 1C 0256 and tractor No. RJ 19 RA 0717, the respondent no.1 who happens to be son of the car owner was injured.

2. Learned Tribunal accepting claim awarded compensation Rs.92,000/- payable by appellant car insurer, car owner and tractor driver cum owner.

3. Insurer challenges questions his liability.

4. The only question argued and involved is whether person who happens to be son of owner of vehicle i.e. private and not driving the vehicle which insured for only Act liability is entitled for reimbursement on the insurer of that vehicle. In other words, the insurer under only Act policy to reimburse for a person not driving the very vehicle insured.

5. Learned counsel submits that admittedly injured was occupier in a car which owned by father and driven by other person and insurance being only to the mandatory extent of Act liability and driven by other person so the insurer is under no obligation to indemnify for such a person as does not come in third person or any person. Argued that for injured liability could have been of said other vehicle involved tractor.

6. In support of contentions cited are MACD 2008 (SC) 272

Click Here to Read the rest of this document