Tags:
Journalism of Courage
In major relief for accident victims,the Supreme Court has ruled that an insurance firm cannot deny compensation on the ground that a driver had a licence only for a light motor vehicle but it was being used as a commercial vehicle,like a taxi.
A bench of Justices S S Nijjar and M Y Eqbal,underscoring the motor vehicle laws objective to safeguard interests of road accident victims,held that an insurer cannot shirk its duty to compensate a victim only because a light motor vehicle was being used for commercial purposes. In various motor accident cases,insurers have been questioning their liability to pay,contending that a person licenced to drive a light vehicle is not authorised to drive a commercial vehicle. Hence,a driver,the companies argue,cannot be said to possess valid licence under the Motor Vehicles Act to make them liable to pay for third party risks.
However,the SCs verdict demolishes this defence by making the insurance firms absolutely liable to pay to victims in cases where a light motor vehicle,including array of Sports Utility Vehicles,is used as a taxi or for carrying light goods.
This verdict is set to act as a precedent for motor accident claims tribunal across the states where victims persistently attempt to convince the judges that a mere use of a light motor vehicle for some commercial purposes will not take away the insurance companies liability to pay them for injuries.
The insurer cannot disown its liability on the ground that though the driver was licenced to drive a light motor vehicle but before driving light motor vehicle used as commercial vehicle,no endorsement to drive commercial vehicle was obtained in the driving licence, ruled the Bench.
