Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 49718
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Shoba Annamma Eapen, J
SALY TOMY, ABISHAY TOM (MINOR), ANNLIYA TOM (MINOR), AKSHAY TOM (MINOR) – Appellant
Versus
JOSNA, ASIN ROSE BIJU (MINOR), ANAS BIJU (MINOR), ROSAMMA, THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER DIVISIONAL OFFICE, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, THRESSIAMMA – Respondent
MACA NO. 3411 OF 2014
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.ABRAHAM P.GEORGE
For the Respondents: SHRI.P.JACOB MATHEW, SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.)
Insurers are not liable for compensation claims by deceased owners under comprehensive policies beyond stipulated personal accident coverage.
Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicle Act - Sections regarding liability of insurer - The claimants sought compensation following a fatal accident due to alleged negligent driving, claiming a total of ₹30,00,000 - Tribunal awarded ₹44,46,540 but limited insurer’s liability to ₹2,00,000 based on policy coverage - Court found deceased, as owner and driver, not entitled to third-party claims as per insurance norms. (Paras 2, 3, 8)
(B) Insurance Coverage - The liability of the insurer under comprehensive policy limits personal accident cover to specified amount, denying further compensation for family members not classified as third parties. (Paras 8, 9)
Facts of the case:
This appeal arises from an accident involving the deceased Tomy while he was driving a jeep that capsized. The claimants are the legal heirs seeking compensation under the Motor Vehicle accident claims tribunal.
Findings of Court:
The court affirmed the tribunal's decision, emphasizing statutory limitations on compensation claims due to the deceased’s status as owner.
Issues: Main questions involved limits of insurance coverage, exceptions for legal heirs of owners involved in fatal accidents, and statutory interpretations of third-party claims under motor insurance regulations.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that the deceased being both owner and insured precludes his legal heirs from claiming compensation beyond the defined limits of the insurance policy.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim for compensation following a motor accident involving the deceased. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. court's observations on insurance policy limits and legal standing. (Para 4) |
| 3. arguments regarding insurance liability limitations. (Para 6) |
| 4. limited compensation entitlement for deceased's legal heirs. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT The above appeal is filed by the appellants/claimants in OP(MV)
No.141 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Wayanad. The respondents herein were the respondents before the tribunal.
2. According to the claimants on 30.04.2010 at about 10.30 pm, while the deceased Tomy was travelling in a jeep bearing registration No.KL-12D-4000, it capsized and the deceased sustained severe injuries and succumbed to them. The accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the jeep, who also died in the accident. The legal heirs of the deceased Tomy approached the ₹
tribunal claiming a total compensation of 30,00,000/- .
3. Respondents 1 to 4 were the legal heirs of the driver of the vehicle/deceased Biju Anto. The 5th respondent was the insurer of the offending jeep. The 6th respondent is the mother of the deceased Tomy, who is a legal heir of the deceased. Though respondents 1 to 3 entered the appearance, no written statement was filed. The 4th respondent did not appear before the tribunal and was set ex parte. Respondents 5 and 6 have filed written statements before the tribunal.
The 5th respondent, insurer filed a written statement, admitting the policy, but disputing the quantum of compensation claimed by the claimants. The 6th respondent filed a written statement contending that she being the dependent mother was also entitled to get the compensation. Before the tribunal, Exts.A1 to A13(s) were marked. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, ₹
awarded a sum of 44,46,540/- as compensation under different heads with interest @7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization, against the respondents 1-5 jointly and severally. The 5th respondent being the insurer is liable only for an amount of ₹
2,00,000/-. Challenging the finding of the tribunal limiting the ₹
liability of the insurer to 2,00,000/-, the claimants have filed this appeal.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the claimants and the learned standing counsel appearing for the insurance company.
5. The learned counsel for the claimants submitted that the ₹
tribunal has awarded a total compensation of 44,46,540/- but had ₹
limited the liability of the insurer company to 2,00,000/- being the personal accident coverage as per the policy. The learned counsel further contended that personal injury to the insured is also covered under the policy and therefore, the legal heirs are entitled to claim compensation.
6. The learned standing counsel appearing for the insurance company submitted that Ext.A4 policy was a comprehensive policy but not an Act only policy. The deceased, being the owner of the vehicle, does not fall within the definition of a third party under the Act.
7. I have considered the rival contentions on both sides.
8. Admittedly, the owner/insured was the deceased in the motor accident and his legal heirs approached the tribunal claiming compensation. The Tribunal found that, since the owner himself was the deceased, he could not be treated as a third party and therefore, his legal heirs were not entitled to claim compensation. Ext.A4 policy was a comprehensive policy. A copy of the said policy was handed over to me by the learned counsel for the appellants. On a perusal of the said copy of the policy, it is seen that the Personal Accident Cover ₹
under Section III for owner – driver was limited to 2,00,000/-. Since he was both the owner and the insured of the vehicle, the liability of the insurance company extended only to indemnifying the insured against claims by third parties or in respect of damage to property. Thus, the liability of the insurance company is only to indem
