Poklen is "motor vehicles" under Motor Vehicles Act : Insurance companies cannot deny liability

Chhattisgarh High Court Upholds Compensation in Fatal Accident Involving Construction Vehicle.  Insurance Company Held Liable for Third-Party Compensation in Poklen Accident Case

In a significant ruling, the Chhattisgarh High Court has upheld the decision of the 6th Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, directing H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company to compensate the legal heirs of Tarun Kachlame, who was tragically killed in an accident involving a construction vehicle. The court ruled that the Poklen, a construction vehicle involved in the incident, qualifies as a "motor vehicle" under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, thereby obligating the insurance company to cover third-party liabilities.

The accident, which occurred on June 13, 2016, at Boria Tibbu Godawri Mines, led to the death of Tarun Kachlame, a laborer at the site, when a tree struck by the Poklen fell on him. The insurance company had appealed the Tribunal's decision, arguing that the Poklen, being a construction vehicle, did not fall under the statutory definition of a "motor vehicle" and that the insurance policy did not cover such risks.

Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad, while dismissing the appeal, emphasized that the vehicle was being used on a public road for road construction at the time of the accident, thus fitting the definition of a "motor vehicle" under Section 2(28) of the Act. The judgment aligns with previous Supreme Court rulings, which state that vehicles like dumpers and rockers, when suitable for road use, fall within the ambit of the Act.

The court also ordered the insurance company to pay the entire compensation amount, totaling Rs. 7,10,400, to the claimants, with the option to recover a portion from the vehicle owner. The judgment reaffirms the responsibility of insurance companies to honor third-party liabilities even when construction vehicles are involved, provided they are operated on public roads.

Bottom Line:

Poklen, if operated on public roads and involved in accidents, are considered "motor vehicles" under Section 2(28) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Insurance companies cannot deny liability for third-party compensation if the vehicle was insured and the risk of third-party liability was covered.

Statutory provision(s): Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Sections 2(28), 166, 168, 169

Branch Manager H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company v. Kailash Kumar Kachlame, (Chhattisgarh) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2796587