LexORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. versus SURENDRA NATH LOOMBA AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2012] 9 S.C.R. 1007 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. V. SURENDRA NATH LOOMBA AND OTHERS (Civil Appeal Nos. 1345-1346 of 2009 etc.) NOVEMBER 20, 2012 [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.) MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988: A B s. 166 - Motor accident - Claimant traveling in offending C vehicle lost both of his eyes - Compensation - Liability of insurer - Held: Whether the insurer would be liable or not would depend upon the nature of the policy when it is brought on record in a manner as required by law - When Certificate of Insurance is filed but the policy is not brought on record it D only conveys that the vehicle is insured and nature of policy (whether it is "Act Policy" or "Comprehensive/Package Policy'~ cannot be discerned from the same - In the case at hand, the policy has not been brought on record - Matter remitted to Tribunal to enable the insurance company to E produce the policy with liberty to parties to lead further evidence - However, quantum of compensation determined by High Court as Rs.16,42,6561- needs no interference. A car belonging to respondent no. 2, met with an accident as a result of which the claimant, who was F traveling in the said car lost both of his eyes. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, keeping in view the salary and various perquisites of the claimant, who was working as a Senior Manager in a nationalized Bank, awarded a compensation of Rs.20,97,984/- with 9% interest. The G Tribunal held that the insurer had issued the Certificate of Insurance in respect of he vehicle and it was valid when the accident occurred. Both the insurance compaey and the claimant filed appeals before the High 1007 H 1008 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 9 S.C.R. A Court which reduced the compensation toRs.16,42,656/- ln the instant appeals filed, both by the insurance company and the claimant, it was contended for the insurance company that the insurance policy was only B an "Act Policy" and, therefore, no liability of the insurer would arise. Partly allowing the appeals of the insurance company and dismissing those of the claimant, the Court c HELD: 1.1 In the case at hand, the policy has not been brought on record. The stand of the insurer that it is an "Act Policy" has been disputed by the claimant who would submit that the policy may be a "comprehensive/ package policy". When Certificate of Insurance is filed but 0 the policy is not brought on record it only conveys that the vehicle is insured. The nature of policy cannot be discerned from the same. Thus, it would be appropriate to remit the matter to the tribunal to enable the insurer to produce the policy and grant liberty to the parties to file E additional documents and also lead further evidence as advised. Ordered accordingly. [para 14] [1017-E-G] Yashpal Luthra and Anr. V. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Another 2011 ACJ 1415 - relied on. F 1.2 Whether the insurer would be liable or not would depend upon the nature of the policy when it is brought on record in a manner as required by law. [para 15] [1017- H; 1018-A] 1.3 As far as quantum is concerned, the G compensation allowed by the High Court is just and proper compensation requiring no interference. [para 6 and 16] [1018-B] United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Shim/a v. Tilak Singh H and 2006 (3) SCR 758 = (2006) 4 SCC 404; Oriental ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. v. 1009 SURENDRA NATH LOOMBA Insurance Company Ltd. v. Jhuma Saha (Smt.) 2007 (1) SCR A 979 =(2007) 9 SCC 263, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Sudhakaran K. V. and others 2008 (9) SCR 367 = (2008) 7 SCC 428 and New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Sadanand Mukhi and others 2008 (17) SCR 1313 = (2009) 2 SCC 417; National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Laxmi Narain Dhut 8 2007 (3) SCR 579 = (2007) 3 SCC 700; Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Meena Variyal and Other 2007 (4) SCR 641 = (2007) 5 SCC 428; Bhagyalakshmi and others v. United Insurance Company Limited and another 2009 (7) SCR 1031 = (2009) 7 SCC 148; Amrit Lal Sood and Another v. c Kaushalya Devi Thapar and Others 1998 (2) SCR 284 = (1998) 3 SCC 744; and National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Balakrishnan & Another 2012 (11) JT 260 - referred to. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. V. Asha Rani 2002 (4) Suppl. SCR 543 = (2003) 2 sec 223 - cited. D Case Law Reference: 2006 (3) SCR 758 referred to para 7 2007 (1) SCR 979 referred to para 7 E 2008 (9) SCR 367 referred to para 7 2008 (17) SCR 1
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.