IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.568 of 1990 (O&M) Date of decision:21.09.2010 Karam Chand and others ....Appellants versus The New India Assurance Company Limited ...Respondent II. FAO No.622 of 1990 (O&M) The New India Assurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Karam Chand and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr.K.G.Chaudhary, Advocate, for the appellants in FAO No.568 of 1990 and for respondents in FAO No.622 of 1990. Mr. L.M.Suri, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate, for the appellant in FAO No.622 of 1990 and for the respondent in FAO No.568 of 1990. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? ---- K.Kannan, J. 1. The driver of the tractor was the son of the owner and the former died when it turned turtle, in his attempt to save a child that came darting across the road. The claimants were the father (owner), mother and sister of the deceased. 2. The policy of insurance is an Act policy and the risk to a FAO No.568 of 1990 (O&M) - 2 - driver could only be a driver who is required to be covered under the Workmen's Compensation Act. The limit of liability under Section 11-1 (i) of the policy reads under the Caption 'liability to third parties' – for death or bodily injury to any person caused by or arising out of the use of the vehicle. Driver is not a third party. There is no cause of action for the owner/insured to make a claim against himself and in turn make the insurer liable. 3. The petition for compensation was not maintainable and rightly dismissed. The appeal in FAO No.568 of 1990 by the claimants is dismissed. The claimants had filed a petition for compensation for own damage to the vehicle. The Tribunal assessed the damage at Rs.34,000/- and directed the insurer to pay. The Insurance Company is in appeal contending that a claim by the owner against its own insurer is not maintainable before the Tribunal. While upholding the contention, I still do not want to interfere with the award, since substantial justice had been done. The insurer ought to have satisfied the OD claim even without driving the owner to the brink to file a petition. The insurer, would otherwise make himself liable for damages for deficiency of service in yet another forum, if a claim had been filed before the Consumer Forum. The appeal by the insurer shall stand dismissed. The direction contained in the interim order for furnishing security by the owner to claim the amount awarded for damage to the vehicle is ordered to be released. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 21.09.2010 sanjeev IN THE HIGH COU