The Thane Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) has dismissed a claim filed by a woman following the death of her husband in an accident in 2012.
MACT member and district judge K D Vadane observed that the claimants were not eligible for any compensation as Nitin Shewale, had borrowed the motorcycle which met with the accident, from one of the respondents.
Hence, Shewale was not a victim in terms of the motor accident claims, the judge said in his order on April 27.
The claimants in the case were Shewale's 33-year-old wife, two minor children and mother, all residents of Pradhan Pada in the district's Murbad taluka. They filed the claim against motorcycle owner Vishal S Bhoir and Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd.
They told the tribunal that on April 23, 2012 Shewale, a self-employed man earning Rs 3,000 per month, was riding the motorcycle on Kavahli-Saralgaon road.
When Shewale reached Bhadanegaon, the two-wheeler slipped and he fell from it and sustained severe injuries which led to his death, the claimants told the tribunal.
The deceased's family sought the claim under the Motor Vehicles Act section 163A (the owner of the motor vehicle or the authorised insurer shall be liable to pay in the case of death or permanent disablement due to accident arising out of the use of vehicle).
The vehicle owner did not make any written submission but the insurer contested the claim, saying Shewale had borrowed the motorcycle, therefore he stepped into the owner's shoes. Thus, the claim was not maintainable, the insurer said.
The judge said the complaint reveals that at the time of accident, Shewale was driving the motorcycle which he had borrowed from his friend's father.
"In such a situation, the deceased steps into the shoes of the vehicle's owner. The (insurance) policy does not cover the risk of the owner and of an unpaid driver. It covers the risk of the paid driver only," he noted, adding in this case, Shewale was not a paid driver or workman of the vehicle owner.
Therefore, the claim filed by the legal heirs of the deceased under section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed, and the applicants are not entitled for any compensation, the judge said.
(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)