Act favours insurers, not road victims

Chennai: The Motor Vehicle (Amendment) Bill 2016 may have been promoted as a landmark legislative exercise by the BJP government, but the advocates in Madras High court and lawyers practising in the Motor Accident Tribunal have apprehensions over it. They have accused the Central government of supporting the cause of the insurance sector instead of road accident victims.

According to them, the Central Government has refused to consider the plight of the accident victims and their family members as they not only undergo serious ordeal after a mishap but also face long and gruelling legal battles. The insurance firms, which are liable to pay compensation, take them for a ride delaying the release of the compensation despite court orders. The proposed Bill comes as a rude shock to them.

As of now, depending upon various factors including, the age and income of the accident victim, the courts hold the insurance firms liable to pay compensation to the victims and their family members. In several cases the compensation runs upto Rs 2 crore.

The compensation awarded to them as per the Act as a social security measure and to help them to lead decent/normal lives after the incident. An advocate specialising in Motor Accident cases, V.S. Suresh said, “Any amount of compensation would be insufficient to the victims and their family members. However, the present Act prescribed certain criteria to decide on the quantum of compensation and holds the insurance firm liable to pay the amount”.

He said the proposed Bill puts a cap on liability. It seeks to replace the Section 147(2)(a) of present Act) with a new provision, which puts an upper limit of liability of insurer to an extent of Rs 10 lakh in respect of death and Rs 5 lakhs in respect of bodily injury arising out of motor vehicle accident.

In case the court awards more than Rs 10 lakh in case of death and Rs 5 lakh in case of injury, victims would have to realise / obtain the excess amount from the owner or driver of the vehicle. As per the present law, non-receipt of premium would not amount to breach of a statutory condition. The proposed bill enables insurer to seek exoneration from liability for non-receipt of premium. It is settled in law that once an insurance certificate is issued, then the insurer will have to meet third party claims, notwithstanding the fact that it was entitled to avoid or cancel the policy; although it can later recover the amount from the insured.
 Suresh said as of now the country has 25 insurance firms of which only five belonged to the public sector.

The Central Government has been giving undue importance to the Bill only to support the private insurance firms. Once the Bill is enacted, the road mishap victims are bound to face more serious ordeals as getting compensation from owner and driver would become a Herculean task.

Advocate A.Balamurugan said though the Bill proposed to introduce several path breaking measures, it has several flaws. It banks on the deterrent theory. The Government hopes that higher punishment would bring down mishaps and maladies in the transport sector. In fact, higher / more severe punishment would lead to more corruption.

The Government has failed to strengthen and modernise the transport and road sector. Necessary funds are also not earmarked for the sector. The government must study the reasons for the cause of accidents. A majority of accidents are triggered by non-compliance of traffic rules, drunken driving and bad roads. Without addressing the basic issues, the government has proposed to amend the Act, he added.