Insurers under Act Policies are not liable for occupant injuries in vehicle accidents, highlighting the distinction from comprehensive policies that cover such risks.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

1. One Sh. Piar Singh (husband of claimant No.1, son of claimant No.6 and father of claimants No.2 to 5) was travelling in a Car on 21.02.2010. Smt. Santosh (respondent No.1 in the claim petition) was the registered owner of the vehicle, who had statedly transferred the ownership of vehicle to Sh. Pawan Kumar (respondent No.4) in the claim petition). The vehicle driven by Sh. Achhar Pal (respondent No.2 in the claim petition) met with an accident, resulting in Piar Singh’s death.

In the claim petition, learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (in short ‘Tribunal’) held that the accident was caused on account of rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by Sh. Achhar Pal (respondent No.2 in the claim petition). For assessing the quantum of compensation, learned Tribunal held that the evidence on record established that the deceased was a skilled worker, hence, his income was taken as Rs.6000/- per month. Total compensation amount was computed as under:-

Liability to pay the compensation amount was fastened upon the Insurance-Company (respondent No.3 in the claim petition). Feeling aggrieved, the insurer has instituted the present appeal.

Parties hereinafter are being referred to according to their status before the learned Tribunal.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file as well as the record.

3. Sh. Ashwani K. Sharma, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant-Insurer has raised mainly twofold submissions:-

(I). On quantum of compensation.

(II). On liability of the insurer to pay the compensation.

4. The above two points are being discussed separately hereinafter.

4(A). Quantum of compensation:-

4(A)(i). The contention raised by the insurer is that the learned Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.6000/- per month. Piar Singh was a skilled worker, who lost his life in the accident on 21.02.2010. At that time, as per the minimum wages notification, Rs.138.60/- were the daily wages for the skilled worker or in other words, Rs.4158/- per month were payable to a skilled worker under the minimum wages notification dated 01.02.2010, issued by the Department of Labour and Employment, Himachal Pradesh. Hence, according to the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, the computation of the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.6000/- was unwarranted.

4(A)(ii). It is a fact that the deceased was in an unorganized sector. In Civil Appeal No.5461 of 2023 (Kubrabibi & Ors. Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.) , decided on 28.08.2023, it was claimed that the deceased aged 35 years at the time of motor accident was working as a Mechanic and his monthly income from all sources was Rs.9000/-. The High Court reduced the monthly income to Rs.3000/-. Hon’ble Apex Court deprecated the approach of assessing the income on the basis of strict evidence and observed that the family members, who were before the Court seeking compensation on account of death of their bread earner who was not employed in a secure job, would not be in a position to secure all evidence of his income. It was held as under: -

“It is unfortunate that in a case of the present nature, the High Court while assessing the evidence available on record, has sought to seek strict evidence with regard to the income of the deceased. Wh