Personal accident cover for owner-driver is enforceable under contract despite non-maintainability of third-party negligence claims.

The appellant (mother of the deceased) filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhanced compensation for the death of her son, Ashish Patel.

The deceased was driving a vehicle owned by his father (Respondent No. 1) when he met with a fatal accident caused by a mechanical failure in the vehicle; no other vehicle was involved.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Pratappur, awarded Rs. 50,000/-.

The appellant challenged this as inadequate, while the Insurance Company (Respondent No. 2) maintained that since the deceased was the driver-cum-owner’s son and responsible for the accident, the claim was limited.

1. Whether a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act is maintainable when the deceased was the victim of his own actions and not a "third party".

2. Whether the Insurance Company is liable to pay additional compensation based on the Personal Accident (PA) cover provided in the insurance policy.

The Court primarily applied the precedent established by the Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Ashalata Bhowmick and Others (2018) 9 SCC 801, which held that an owner-cum-driver (or their legal heirs) cannot maintain a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act if the accident was caused by the deceased's own negligence/fault, as the deceased is not a "third party".

The court recognized that liability can still arise under the specific contractual terms of the insurance policy regarding "Personal Accident" cover for owner-drivers.

The Court observed that since the deceased was driving his father's vehicle and the accident resulted from mechanical failure without involvement of a third-party vehicle, a claim under Section 166 was technically not maintainable based on the Ashalata Bhowmick precedent.

However, upon perusal of the insurance policy (Ex. D/1), the Court found that the owner had paid a specific premium of Rs. 100/- for "Personal Accident" cover for the owner-driver.

Under this contractual liability, the Insurance Company was bound to pay a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-. Since the Tribunal had only awarded Rs. 50,000/-, the Court determined that the appellant was entitled to the remaining balance of the contractual limit.

The Court directed Respondent No. 2 to pay an additional compensation of Rs. 50,000/- (totaling Rs. 1,00,000/-) with 6% interest per annum from the date of filing (03/01/2019) until realization and the impugned award was modified accordingly.