Supreme Court Rules Insurance Company Not Liable for Claimant's Injuries If Trailer Not Insured, Even If Tractor Is Insured
The Supreme Court has ruled that the insurance company holds no responsibility for the injuries sustained by the claimant
trueasdfstory
Supreme Court Rules Insurance Company Not Liable for Claimant's Injuries If Trailer Not Insured, Even If Tractor Is Insured The Supreme Court has ruled that the insurance company holds no responsibility for the injuries sustained by the claimant while traveling in an uninsured trailer even if the tractor to which the trailer was attached possessed valid insurance coverage. The Apex...
Supreme Court Rules Insurance Company Not Liable for Claimant's Injuries If Trailer Not Insured, Even If Tractor Is Insured
The Supreme Court has ruled that the insurance company holds no responsibility for the injuries sustained by the claimant while traveling in an uninsured trailer even if the tractor to which the trailer was attached possessed valid insurance coverage.
The Apex Court bench observed that both the tractor and trailer must be insured when they are involved in an accident.
In this particular instance, the Bombay High Court increased the compensation to ₹9,99,280, accompanied by an annual interest rate of 9 per cent. However, considering the circumstance that the claimant was a passenger in an uninsured trailer connected to an insured tractor, the High Court absolved the Insurance Company of any liability.
The Supreme Court agreed with the High Court's view that the insurance company is not liable for the claimant's injuries if the claimant was traveling in a trailer that was not insured, even if the tractor to which the trailer was attached was insured.
The Bench observed that the claimant, a female labourer, was approximately 20 years old at the time of the accident and was in transit within the tractor-trailer combination.
Due to the injuries she suffered in the accident, including the amputation of her left lower limb above the knee, resulting in a 100 per cent disability, her marriage prospects and ability to lead a normal life have been severely affected. Given these circumstances, the Court noted that it would not be feasible for her to recover the amount from the owner. The Bench relied on its judgment in Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Brij Mohan (2007) 7 SCC 56.
Consequently, the Bench issued a directive for the Insurance Company to disburse the compensation amount, as determined by the High Court, along with the accumulated interest, and subsequently recover the said sum from the vehicle owner.