Paid-cleaner coverage extends to labourers, requiring the insurer to satisfy the compensation award.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), Rajpipla, in MACP No. 160 of 2017, directed the appellant-insurer to satisfy the claim and recover the amount from Opponent No. 3, relying on the “pay and recover” principle

The insurer appealed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

The High Court considered its earlier decision in a connected appeal arising from the same Tribunal judgment, which addressed the policy coverage and driving-licence issues

Whether the Tribunal’s direction requiring the insurer to satisfy the award and recover the amount from the vehicle owner warranted interference

Whether the policy and alleged absence of a valid driving licence provided grounds to set aside that direction

Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for an appeal to the High Court against an award of a Claims Tribunal

The Court referred to the “pay and recover” principle discussed in Shamanna & Anr. v. Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors., 2018 ACJ 2163, and to New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Sureshchandra Aggarwal, 2009 (3) TAC 586 (SC)

It also relied on the reasoning in the connected appeal, which considered United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sujata Arora & Ors., 2013 A.C. 749 (SC), and held that the policy’s premium for a paid driver, conductor and cleaner under IMT-40 covered the relevant risk, while the finding regarding the driver’s licence was not disturbed

Applying the reasoning in the connected appeal, the Court found no basis to interfere with the Tribunal’s direction.

The policy included a premium for coverage of a paid driver, conductor and cleaner; in the connected matter, the claimant’s status as a labourer was treated as comparable to that of a cleaner

Although the Tribunal had found that the driver lacked a valid and effective licence, the connected appeal concluded that this finding did not justify disturbing the pay-and-recover order in the circumstances

The Court adopted that reasoning for the present appeal

It directed the Tribunal to disburse the entire amount held by it to the original claimants after due verification, passing fresh disbursement orders if required, and directed that the record and proceedings be returned to the Tribunal