terms and conditions of the policy Ex.R-3, IMT 17 Ex.R-4, IMT 28 Ex.R-5. On conclusion of evidence and arguments ... further submitted by the OP that separate premium under IMT 28, is certified to be paid for the coverage of the driver of the vehicle
ground that deceased driver of the vehicle
was insured under IMT 28 by paying premium by the owner of the
vehicle and, therefore ... under Workmen Compensation Act, 1923 .
The insurance policy was obtained under IMT 28 and not under IMT
17, so the Insurance Company was not liable
vehicle. There is a
clause in the policy i.e. IMT 28 under
the heading Legal Liability to the paid
driver or Conductor. Here also ... Clause relied upon by the District Forum will not apply to IMT 28. This clause reads as follows:
The company shall indemnify the insured against
mYysf[kr lafonk ds vuqlkj LL to Paid
Driver/Conductor/Cleaner (IMT 28) Rs. 150/- okgu ds osruHkksxh pkyd@
dUMDVj@Dyhuj ... chek ikWfylh ds vuqlkj LL to
Paid Driver/Conductor/Cleaner (IMT 28) Rs. 150/- dk izhfe;e izkIr fd;k x;k gS
ftlds vuqlkj
collected for the driver
and 11 employees and that under IMT 28 and 40 the complainant is entitled to get
Rs.2 lakhs and that ... amount under Personal Accident. The relevant IMTs are quoted for ready
feference.
IMT.
28. Legal liability to paid driver and/or conductor and/or cleaner
unnamed
persons and Rs.50/- LL to paid Driver IMT 28 for Rs.1 lakh.
Unfortunately on 05.08.2015, when the son of complainants; namely,
Gaurav
lamps, tyres, tubes etc. Rs.1,168.56 LL to paid Driver IMT 28 Rs.100.00
Sub Total (Additions) Rs.1,68.56 Sub Total (Additions
Insurance Company Ltd and others vs Konduru Lakshmi and others decided on
28-07-2011 wherein it was held that the legal heirs ... personal
accident of owner when he drives the
insured vehicle. IMT 28 and 39 were quoted which read as under:
I.M.T.28 LEGAL
period from 4.3.2009 to 3.3.2010. For additional cover under Clauses IMT 17,28 & 39, an additional
premium of Rs.5757.66 was also paid ... insured i.e. on 3.3.2009, but the endorsement containing Clauses IMT 39,28
& 17 forming part of the Policy, was received by the complainant
policy, appellant had opted for only 16, 22 & 28 IMT
endorsements and not IMT-23. So, nothing is
payable to the appellant, on account
