Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA
United India Insurance Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Aegolapu , Pusala Premala, Premala – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim for compensation due to death in accident (Para 1 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. claimants' dependency and financial loss arguments (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. insurance company's defense on liability and policy terms (Para 10 , 11 , 14) |
| 4. pillion rider not covered under liability policy (Para 16 , 17) |
| 5. judgment overturning liability of insurance company (Para 19 , 20) |
JUDGMENT :
NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA, J.
1. This appeal is filed by the appellant-Insurance Company under Section 173 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988, against the Award and decree passed by the court of the M.A.C.T-Cum-Principal District and Sessions Judge, Adilabad (hereinafter referred to ‘learned Tribunal’) in M.V.O.P.No.56 of 2017, dated 27.08.2019, wherein, learned Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- to the claimants/respondents herein.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed before the learned Tribunal.
3. The brief facts of the case are that claimant filed M.V.O.P.No.56 of 2017 under Section 163-A) of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 seeking compensation on account of death of the deceased i.e., Aegolapu @ Pusala Mahesh Goud. On 27.03.2014, the deceased was pro
Insurance liability under a 'Liability only Policy' does not extend to cover claims for injuries or deaths of gratuitous passengers, including pillion riders.
An act only policy under the Motor Vehicles Act does not cover the risk of a pillion rider, and the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation for injuries sustained by a pillion rider.
Act policy excludes coverage for pillion rider on two-wheeler as gratuitous passenger; LMV (NT) licence invalid for motorcycle; insurer exonerated, owner liable for compensation.
An 'Act Only Policy' does not cover pillion riders unless additional premium is paid, and such riders cannot be treated as third parties under the insurance policy in the context of liability for acc....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the risk of the pillion rider cannot be covered under the 'Act Only Policy' without any extra premium.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the liability of the Insurance Company to pay compensation despite the violation of the insurance policy terms, and the application of the 'pay and....
The court upheld the applicability of 'no-fault' liability provisions under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, confirming the Tribunal's compensation award without requiring proof of negligence....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that under an 'act only' policy, the insurance company's liability does not extend to covering the risk of the pillion rider, as per the interpreta....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
