Delhi District Court
Sh. Balwant Singh (Father Of Deceased) vs Sh. Keshav Dut Pandey S/O Sh. Heera on 9 June, 2011
IN THE COURT OF SHRI CHANDRA BOSE: JUDGE:MACT:DELHI
MACT NO. : 306 /10
UNIQUE ID NO :02404C0158962010
LR's of Narender Singh
1. Sh. Balwant Singh (Father of deceased)
2. Smt. Basanti Devi (Mother of deceased)
3. Smt. Geeta (Wife of deceased)
All R/o Plot No. 47, Sec4, Timarpur, Delhi
............Claimants
Versus
1. Sh. Keshav Dut Pandey S/o Sh. Heera
R/o 117, Sec4, Timarpur, Delhi
..... owner
2. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Cannaught Circle, Jeevan Bharti Building, Delhi
...... Insurance co.
DATE OF INSTITUTION : 08.07.10
DATE OF RESERVING ORDER: 09.12.10
DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.06.11
AWARD
1. DAR was filed by the IO after collecting all the relevant evidence which was
converted into claim petition on 08.07.10 and was registered as such. Ld. Counsel for
insurance co. instead of giving offer of compensation filed reply wherein it is stated that the
claim is not maintainable as deceased was not third party. Therefore, case was adjourned for
MACT No. 306/10 1 of 3
arguments on this point. I heard arguments on the point whether claim is maintainable or
not. As per RC of Motorcycle no. DL6SX1024 on which deceased was going, the
registered owner has been mentioned as Keshav Dutt Pandey.
2. Ld. Counsel for LR' of deceased submits that deceased who was driving the
motorcycle was third party. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel submits that deceased was not
third party. He has relied upon the case law namely HDFC Chub General Insurance Co.
Appellant Vs. Shanti Devi Raj Bal Singh Thakur and Ors 2008 ACJ1208 (Bombay
High Court) and OIC Appellant Vs. Meena Veriyal and Ors Respondents 2007(2) TAC
417 (SC) in support of his arguments.
3. As per case law namely HDFC Chub Appellant Vs. Shanti Devi Rajbalsingh Thakur Ors (Supra), it has been held that victim would not be considered as 3rd Party who is a person himself negligent.
4. In case law namely OIC Vs. Meena Veriyal Respondents (Supra), it has been held that the insurance co. cannot be held liable to indemnify the owner for the death of one of his employees who was the driver of the vehicle when the liability does not arise under Workmen Compensation Act. Consequently, it was held that 3rd Party cover would not question to any person and the insurance co. cannot be made automatically liable to cover the driver of the vehicle.
5. In the case in hand, deceased Narender Singh was himself driving the motorcycle no. DL6SX1024 and met with an accident and no other vehicle had hit him. In the present case, claimants are the LR's of deceased who was himself driving the motorcycle and the claim has been made against Insurance co. of the motorcycle no. DL6SX1024 which was being driven by the deceased. Since the deceased was himself negligent, therefore, his LR's cannot come under the category of 3rd Party in view of ratio of case law namely HDFC Chub Appellant Vs. Shanti Devi Rajbalsingh Thakur Ors (Supra). The insurer of the MACT No. 306/10 2 of 3 motorcycle which was being driven by the deceased himself cannot be held liable to indemnify its owner for the death of Narender who was driver of the vehicle.
6. In view of my findings as above, I am of the view that claim is not maintainable against owner and insurer of the motorcycle no. DL6SX1024 and the same is accordingly disposed of.
7. DAR is disposed of on aforesaid terms. File be consigned to record room. Copy be provided to both the parties for compliance.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT (CHANDRA BOSE) ON 09.06.11 JUDGE/MACT:ROHINI MACT No. 306/10 3 of 3