Insurers are obligated to compensate occupants of an insured vehicle under the Motor Vehicles Act, even if those occupants are legal heirs of the driver, affirming their status as third parties.

JUDGMENT :

ANISH DAYAL, J.

1. These appeals have been filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (‘MV Act’) by the Insurance Company challenging impugned award dated 08^th October 2025 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal [hereinafter ‘Tribunal ’], North West, Rohini Courts, Delhi in MACT Case No. 449556/2016 titled as Dhiraj Trehan v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr .and in MACT Case No. 450066/2016 titled as Geeta Trehan v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr .

2. Appellant/United India Insurance Company (‘Insurance Company’) has preferred this challenge essentially on the grounds that both Dhiraj Trehan and Geeta Trehan (hereinafter, “claimants”) who were occupants of the car driven by Kamal Trehan, father of Dhiraj Trehan and husband of Geeta Trehan.

3. The only contention raised by Insurance Company was that compensation could not be awarded to claimants, since after the death Kamal Trehan/driver and owner of the vehicle, claimants being legal heirs of the deceased became co-owners of the vehicle and stepped into the shoes of Kamal Trehan, who was the insured.

The Accident

4. On 05^th October 2013, at about 05:40 A.M., Geeta Trehan, wife of late Kamla Trehan and Dhiraj Trehan, son of late Kamal Trehan, along with other co-passengers, Basanti, Sushila, Deepika and Kaushalya Devi were travelling in a Maruti Van, bearing registration no. DL-5CC-0255 (hereinafter “offending vehicle”) going to Village Jatkhor, Delhi to attend a Sangat.

5. It was alleged that the offending vehicle was being driven at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner by Kamal Trehan/driver and when they reached in front of Village Ladpur, offending vehicle collied against divider of the road and as a result of the impact; claimants sustained grievous injuries. Kamal Trehan/Driver sustained fatal injuries and was declared brought dead.

6. Detailed Accident Report (‘DAR’) was registered and the offending vehicle was found to be insured with appellant/Insurance Company.

Impugned Award

7. The two claim petitions were decided by a common order. Dhiraj Trehan was examined as PW-1, Geeta Trehan was examined as PW-2, Rajeev, Technician, Medical Record Department from Primus Super Speciality Hospital, Chanakyapuri was examined as PW-3, Sapna, Medical Record Technician from Saroj Super Speciality Hospital, Madhuban Chowk, Delhi was examined as PW-4, Dr. Adarsh Kishore Singh, Senior Orthopaedic, BSA Hospital was examined as PW-5.

8. On appreciation of evidence adduced by parties, Tribunal came to the conclusion that in view of unrebutted testimonies of PW-1 and PW- 2, corroborated by criminal case record, Kamal Trehan/driver of offending vehicle was responsible for causing the accident due to the rash and negligent driving in which the claimants sustained grievous injuries.

9. Compensation was awarded by Tribunal to Geeta Trehan, in the following manner:

10. Compensation was awarded by Tribunal to Dhiraj Trehan, in the following manner:

11. Liability was imposed on the Insurance Company, as it was not their case that any of the terms and conditions of insurance policy had been breached or violated by the insured, namely, deceased driver.

Submissions on behalf of Appellant

12. Mr. Brijesh Kumar Sharma, counsel for appellant/Insurance Company has raised a novel argument wherein he contended that, sin