S.147(1)(ii) m.v.act
Rahul Singh
(Querist) 01 May 2012
This query is : Resolved
As the legal position of the employee of an individual/ firm whilst on duty according to the definition of MV Act u/s -147(1) ii states "the insurer need not to cater the needs of insurance other than driver
conductor,ticket examiner in buslabourer in truck along with driver and cleaner
to cover any contractual liability but policy shall not be required to cover liability in respect of the death, arising out of and in the course of employment, of the employee of a person insured by the policy or in respect of bodily injury sustained by such an employee arising out of or in the course of employment other than a liability arising under WCC Act.1923.
Here the question is that-we have got a petition stating that a lad was working under the owner of our insured two wheeler as computer operator, while he was using his master's two wheeler he sustained injury,our defence was that, being an employee of the Owner of two wheeler, suppose we can not consider this lad as third party, at the same time, thre's no provision for covering the risk of employee in two wheeler and no premium found collcted to cater the risk of employee. To prove this legal position I need strong supporting rulings.Kindly guide.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 01 May 2012
the insurance company can pay legal fees contact a local lawyer
Shonee Kapoor
(Expert) 03 May 2012
Rightly advised.
Regards,
Shonee Kapoor
harassed.by.498a@gmail.com
J K Agrawal
(Expert) 04 May 2012
Dear Mr Rahul
In so called 'ACT ONLY' policy the insurer is bound to insure minimum as stated under s 147. It means if the insurer charged even a single rupee he will liable up to extent stated in S 147.
If any one want to cover more he should pay more and as such insurer is not bound to cover "other employees" without charging extra.
In strict sense the "Comprehensive policy" means that coverage of Own damage plus ACT Only policy. Then How an other person like driver who is not employed and occupants of the vehicle are covered? There is no extra charge for them.
Now the question comes that the driver (other than employee) and the occupants should be treated as third person so they are covered under s 147.
If so, then they are covered in ACT ONLY policy also.
The total law is not clear and the Supreme Court is making daily a new Rule. If we believe he Ninaagamma ruling and step in shoe concept No driver of any two wheeler is insured in India. Is this was intention of the IRDA or Insurance Companies?
Actually after thousands of Judgments (and after contesting around 1500 cases on S 147 by me) I am confused that what is the Law? I do not understand why the insurance Companies and IRDA is silent and why they do not make a simple rule that 'every human being' is covered. Why insurance company do not charge what ever they want, for this simple term?
