Case Law Details
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Mrunal Makarand Patwardhan (Bombay High Court)
It is common knowledge that the Insurance Companies do not intend to accept genuine insurance claims and shirk from their legal pecuniary liabilities in the name of technicalities or exclusion clauses. One such contentious exclusion clause is ‘Act of God’ which the General Insurance Companies often resort to. In a recent case in The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Versus Smt. Mrunal Makarand Patwardhan & others, the Bombay High Court vide it’s judgment dated 17th February 2023 in First Appeal No. 1180 of 2017 dealt with an identical situation and answered against the Insurance Company.
The primary contention of the Insurance company/appellant was that the accident occurred due to burst of tyre of the offending vehicle, so there was no negligence of the driver of offending vehicle in the accident, it was a pure Act of God and the driver of offending vehicle cannot be considered liable for it and therefore no fiscal liability/claim can be fastened on the Insurance company.
It cannot be denied that proof of negligence is necessary before the owner or the insurer could be held liable for payment of compensation in motor vehicle accident claims as has been held by the Apex Court in Minu B Mehta & Anr. vs Balkrishna Ramchandra Nayan and Anr. 1977 AIR 1248 ; 1977 SCJ 118.
However, the Court negated the contentions of the Insurance company that ‘tyre burst’ is an ‘act of God’ but held that it is an act of ‘human negligence’. The Court dismissed the appeal of the Insurance company and ratified the award of the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal and held thus:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
