Motorcycle vehicle act 166
Rammohan
(Querist) 09 March 2013
This query is : Resolved
Sir/Madam,
I was riding my Maruthi Swift Car in Jan 2013 and had an head on collision with a motorcycle. The motorcyclist had sustained injuries and admitted in hospital for fractured leg and head injuries. I have called the police and narrated the incident and FIR has been filed against me. I have been summoned to Court to pay the fine for the FIR IPC 279 and 338 by end of Jan 2013. My lawyer then said everything is completed and the case is over.Surprisingly, I got a letter from Victim via Motorcycle Tribunal with a copy to my insurance company asking us to appear in Court by end of March under Section 166 of M.V act claiming a compensation of 6 lakh INR. My lawyer says that I dont need appear for this case but some of my other friends say that I should appear or else I am bound to accept whatever decision that has been taken. I have two questions
1. Do I need to appear in the court again? If yes, what I should do. If no, will there be any other summon from court?
2. My insurance is active and valid. Will Insurance company pay all the 6 lak? If not, will I be asked to cover any of the balance that insurance company doesnt pay. Should I be present in Court atlease for this reason ?
Your response will be highly appreciated as this would relieve my stress a lot.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 10 March 2013
Your insurance company would take care of this case.
You need not appear nor bother about this case.
Arvind Singh Chauhan
(Expert) 10 March 2013
Your appearance in court and in tribunal is must.
You have to file your objection in tribunal that you have a valid driving license and vehicle is insured and you were driving with due care, the accident was unavoidable,thus insurance company is liable to pay damages.
In criminal court, if you confess and deposit the fine your negligence in driving is proved, which may harm you in tribunal. It is better to seek bail from court and contest the case.
Rammohan
(Querist) 10 March 2013
Thanks Devajyoti and Arvind for your prompt response. I also got an advice that I can approach the insurance company and provide necessary documents like FIR copy, RC, Insurance etc and file Third party damage. They will fight the case in court and pay the damage directly to the victim. Pl see the link below and section "Claim process in a third party damage"
_http://www.itrust.in/content/personal-finance/Understand-the-car-insurance-claim-process-for-different-scenarios
Pl let me know if any risk is associated with this process. Again Thanks for the response.....
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 10 March 2013
Read the policy document and the come forward if your queyr is still there.
Rammohan
(Querist) 15 March 2013
I went to my insurance office today and submitted motor cycle third party claim form with a copy of RC/Insurance/DL/FIR/Chargesheet/fine receipt paid in court.
Insurance officer told me that this is suffice. An investigating officer would reach out to me to confirm the details of accident. Also, I dont need to appear in court and now insurance company would take it forward. I hope it happens the way that has been said to me to and avoid any further issues for me.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 16 March 2013
If the insurance company finds any breach of policy it will be absolved of any civil liability. The success of their trade depends largely on the violation of policy committed by you. You alone will be responsible to bear the loss suffered by victim.
Your guilt stands established by you r paying fine and not appealing against the fine.
Remember as seen from your blog, only your criminal liability is settled and not civil liability.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 16 March 2013
S/279 is Whoever drives any vehicle, or rides, on any public way in a manner so rash or negligent as to endanger human life, or to be likely to cause hurt or injury to any other person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.
Most likely insurance company will stick to the clause that the vehicle should not have been driven rash and negligently and may like to avoid liability.
Rammohan
(Querist) 22 March 2013
I just browsed whole lot of articles to understand the myth behind the Third Party Insurance..
What is Third Party Insurance?
A third party insurance policy is a policy under which the insurance company agrees to indemnify the insured person, if he is sued or held legally liable for injuries or damage done to a third party. The insured is one party, the insurance company is the second party, and the person you (the insured) injure who claims damages against you is the third party.in common law, an insurer was not permitted to contest a claim of a claimant on merits, i.e. offending vehicle was not negligent or there was contributory negligence. The insurer could contest the claim only on statutory defences specified for in the statute. Thus while enacting Chapter VIII of the 1939 Act or Chapter XI of the 1988 Act, the intention of the legislature was to protect third party rights and not the insurers even though they may be nationalized companies.ā€¯
Insurance Companies have been allowed no other defence except the following: -
(1) Use of vehicle for hire and reward not permit to ply such vehicle.
(2) For organizing racing and speed testing;
(3) Use of transport vehicle not allowed by permit.
(4) Driver not holding valid driving license or have been disqualified for holding such license.
(5) Policy taken is void as the same is obtained by non-disclosure of material fact.
Now, it is apparent that Insurance companies are liable to pay the compensation as decided by the court if they arent able to prove any of the above said items.
In my case, I dont fit in any of the above said, and as the insurance guy said I dont need to appear in court and Insurance company will pay the compensation.
Someone mentioned in this forum, that Insurance company wont pay for my negligence. I believe from the above definition, premium is being paid for covering one's fault. Naturally, an acceptable fault can happen only through negligence. If not,by how?
Its quite strange as why many people have so many differing views when especially such cases are quite common.
I request to highlight, if anyone had found any misunderstanding in my current post
