Insurance companies are not liable for the death of a pillion rider unless an additional premium is paid for coverage, as established under the Motor Vehicles Act.

JUDGMENT :

R.SAKTHIVEL, J.

Feeling aggrieved by the Award dated June 19, 2023 passed in M.C.O.P.No.44 of 2022 on the file of the ‘Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.1, Special District Court, Thiruvallur’ ['Tribunal' for short], the appellants/claimants therein have preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will hereinafter be referred to as per their rank in the Motor Claim Original Petition.

PETITIONERS' CASE

3. The case of the petitioners is that on February 11, 2022 at about 07.30 p.m., the deceased - Meena was riding pillion on the first respondent’s motor cycle bearing Registration No. TN-11-AS-6975 on Nagari to Thirupathi road. The said motorcycle was driven by first respondent in a rash and negligent manner, lost his control and hit a pothole causing imbalance. Consequently, the deceased – Meena fell down and sustained grievous injuries. She was rushed to Nagari Government Hospital for first aid and then, to SVIMS Hospital Tiruvallur for treatment. Despite treatment, she succumbed to the injuries on the same day. The first respondent is the owner cum driver of the motor cycle. The second respondent and third respondents are third party insurer respectively of the said motorcycle. Hence all three respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the petitioners. Accordingly, petitioners are seeking compensation of Rs.60,00,000/- from respondents.

RESPONDENTS ' CASE

4. The first respondent remained ex-parte before the Tribunal.

5. The second respondent filed counter stating that the accident occurred only due to negligence of the deceased who was riding pillion on the first respondent’s motorcycle in a careless manner without holding onto the bike properly. This caused her to fall when the first respondent’s motorcycle hit a pothole. There was no negligence on the part of the first respondent. That apart, the policy issued by the second respondent is named as Standalone Motor Own Damage Policy for two- wheelers covering only damage to the insured motorcycle; it does not cover any damage to properties of third parties, or any injuries or death. The second respondent is not liable to pay any compensation and the petition is to be dismissed against the second respondent.

6. The third respondent filed counter stating that there is no insurance coverage by third respondent for the subject motor cycle covering the claim of the petitioners. This respondent issued Policy No. P0021300059/4113/123192, which is a policy bundled with Act Only Policy for five years and Own Damage Policy for one year for the subject motor cycle bearing Registration No.TN-11-AS-6975, both starting from 10.55 hours of September 15, 2020. The accident had occurred on February 11, 2022. Pillion riders are covered only under Own Damage Policy. While the Own Damage Policy issued by third respondent had expired before the accident, the policy issued by second respondent was valid on the date of accident. Hence, the claim of the petitioners for the death of pillion rider is covered under the policy of second respondent alone and as such if at all any compensation is to be paid, it should be by the second respondent alone statutorily.

TRIBUNAL:

7. The Tribunal framed the following points :-

“ 1. Whether the accident has happened due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the motorcycle bearing registration No.TN-11-AS-6975?

2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation for the accident? If so, from whom?

3. What is the quantum of compensation to be awarded?”

8. During trial, on the side of the petitioners, the first petitioner was examined as P.W.1, one Mr.Raham