TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. GOVINDARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment and decree dated 25.07.2019 passed in M.C.O.P. No. 537 of 2017 by the learned Special Sub Judge, Special Sub Court-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Krishnagiri, is under challenge in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant-Insurance Company mainly contended that the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is not maintainable, in view of the fact that the owner of the vehicle, which met with an accident, himself is the claimant. Thus, the claim cannot be entertained by the Tribunal.

(3.) The Tribunal has further committed an error in awarding a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs under the Personal Accident Cover benefit covered by the policy, without considering the terms and conditions stipulated in the policy. The benefit of Personal Accident Cover is available only in respect of certain injuries specified in the terms and conditions of the policy and not otherwise. The claimant in the present case did not suffer any injury of the nature specified in the Personal Accident Cover and therefore, the award of Rs. 2 lakhs to the claimant under the Personal Accident Cover is also unsustainable.