Madras High Court
Insurance LawCivil Law

An insurer bears no liability for an unauthorised tractor passenger outside policy coverage.

BRANCH MANAGER vs HONESTRAJ

Madras High CourtJUDGMENT: September 30, 20261 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
An insurer bears no liability for an unauthorised tractor passenger outside policy coverage.. BRANCH MANAGER vs HONESTRAJ. Madras High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The claimant, then a minor, was injured after falling from the mudguard of a tractor while travelling as a passenger.

Source reference: pp. 2–4

The Tribunal found the tractor driver negligent and ordered the insurer to pay compensation of ₹1,00,235 and recover it from the vehicle owner, despite finding that the claimant was an unauthorised passenger.

Source reference: pp. 2–4

The insurer appealed, challenging the pay-and-recover direction.

Source reference: p. 4
02

Issues

Whether the insurer could be directed to pay compensation and recover it from the owner when the injured claimant travelled as an unauthorised passenger in a tractor.

Source reference: pp. 4–5, 8–9

Whether the policy covered the claimant’s risk, given that it covered only the tractor’s driver.

Source reference: pp. 6–8
03

Law Applied

Section 147(1)(b) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, requires insurance against specified third-party liabilities, including bodily injury to persons carried in a vehicle within the provision’s scope.

Source reference: pp. 7–8

Relying on United India Insurance Company Limited v. Ammu and five others, 2026 (1) TN MAC 44 (DB), the Court stated that insurance coverage depends on the statutory provision and the terms of the policy; an insurer is not liable for a risk falling outside the policy’s coverage.

Source reference: pp. 7–8
04

Reasoning

The claimant admitted that he was riding on the tractor’s mudguard, and the policy covered only the driver; the tractor’s seating capacity was limited to the driver.

Source reference: pp. 6–7

The Court therefore held that the claimant was an unauthorised passenger whose risk was not covered by the policy. In those circumstances, it found the Tribunal’s pay-and-recover direction unsustainable.

Source reference: pp. 8–9
05

Holding

The appeal was partly allowed.

The Court set aside the Tribunal’s direction requiring the insurer to pay and recover the compensation, exonerated the insurer from liability, and left the claimant at liberty to recover the Tribunal-awarded compensation from the vehicle owner.

Source reference: p. 9

No costs were ordered.

Source reference: p. 9
06

Acts & Sections Cited

2 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Motor Vehicles Act, 19882

Madras High Court

Original Court PDF

BRANCH MANAGERvsHONESTRAJ

Madras High Court · September 30, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment