The main legal point established in the judgment is that the owner of the vehicle, if not covered by additional premium, and being the tortfeasor, is not entitled to compensation under the package policy.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, against the award and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.15 of 2012 on 28.04.2014 on the file of the Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge) at Cheyyar.)

(The case has been heard through video conference)

1. This Appeal is filed under section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act by the Insurance Company raising an interesting question of law, whether the Insurance Company is liable to indemnify the insurer/owner of the vehicle, who is the wife of the claimant and when the said claimant himself is the tortfeasor.

2. The facts of the case is that, on 25.11.2011, when the claimant Rajaram was returning from Chennai to Pondicherry driving the Maruthi Suzuki Alto LXI Car bearing registration No.PY-01-AE-7389, near Thenvanakambadi Village on the Vandavasi to Thellar Road, hit against a palmyrah on the left side of the road. The claimant, who was on the wheels sustained injury and his friend Vinod travelling along with him died.

3. In the accident, the claimant sustained tiny chip fracture of the outer cortex of left frontal bone. (left forehead), liver laceration Grade III, Hemangioma involving segment VII of the liver and fracture of left big toe proximal phalanx. He was admitted in Sri Ramachandra Hospital, Chennai and recovered. The F.I.R was registered based on the complaint given by one Krishnamoorthy, the brother of the deceased Vinod. Criminal case was registered against the claimant for offences under section 279, 377 and 304 (A) of I.P.C.

4. The Claim petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act was filed against the vehicle owner and the insurer of the vehicle for compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. The insured/vehicle owner remained exparte. The insurer resisted the claim primarily on the ground that, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay compensation to the claimant, who being the tort-feasor and not a third party or paid employee of the insured.

5. In support of this submission, the following judgments were relied.

(i). Tarabai and others -vs- Rahul Trading & Finance Co and others reported in 2004 ACJ 1278 and, (ii). United India Insurance Company, Chennai -vs- Ravi & Another reported in 2010 (5) MLJ 406 were relied.

6. Based on the evidence of the claimant and the doctor, who gave the disability certificate (Ex.P.6) and 9 documents marked as Exhibits, the Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.3,04,600/- as compensation, holding that the judgments cited by the Insurance Company is not relevant to the facts of the case.

7. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant/Insurance Company emphasized on the fact that, the claim petition is filed under section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, which can be invoked only by a Third party claimant. Admittedly, the accident occurred due to the negligence of the claimant and he is the husband of the vehicle owner. The premium collected for own damages to the vehicle and third party risk will not cover the driver of the vehicle, who happen to be the tortfeasor. The dictum of the Courts that a person, who is responsible for the accident cannot claim compensation from the insurer either under section 163(A) or under section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, not followed by the Tribunal.

8. The Learned Counsel for the first respondent/claimant referring the Insurance Policy marked as Ex.P-7 submitted that, the vehicle is a private car covered with package policy. The Insurance Company has collected premium of Rs.3,797/- to cover the risk of Own Damage, Third Party claim, Limited Liability for driver-owner. Having collected premium under package policy, the Insurance Company cannot abdicate its contractual obligation of indemnifying the insured.

9. From the evidence, the following facts are established:

1. The claimant is the Tortfeasor.

2. The vehicle owner/insured is the wife of the tortfeasor.

3. The vehicle is covered with package policy. Inclusive of own damages and limited liability for owner-driver.

10.