M/S Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs Rudrappa S/O. Hanumappa Dannur on 18 July, 2013
16. Ex.R.1 - policy, which is placed on record,
discloses that it is an Act policy. It covers only the risk
of the third parties. There is nothing indicated in the
policy-Ex.R.1 to show that they have collected extra
premium covering the risk of the inmates of the vehicle.
This Court in the case of Branch Manager, The New
India Assurance Co. Ltd. V. Mahadev Pandurang Patil,
: 11 :
has held; in case of an Act policy the risk of inmates of
the vehicle is not covered. In order to cover their risk the
owner has to pay extra premium. In this case,
admittedly Ex.R.1 -policy does not disclose that the
owner has paid any extra premium covering the risk of
inmates of the jeep. Admittedly, the claimants were
inmates in the jeep at the time of the accident. Since
Ex.R.1 only an Act policy, the risk of inmates of the jeep
is not covered. The Tribunal without looking into these
aspects in its right perspective has come to an
erroneous conclusion that the risk of the claimants is
covered under Ex.R.1 - policy issued by the
appellant/insurance company which is contrary to the
material on record. Therefore, it cannot be sustained.
Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: