Srinagar, October 22: In a significant interpretation of the Motor Vehicles Act, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Srinagar, has held that the legal heirs of a deceased vehicle owner-cum-driver can claim compensation from the insurer under Section 166 of the Act, provided the deceased was not responsible for the accident and the applicable insurance coverage conditions are satisfied.
The ruling, delivered by Presiding Officer Fayaz Ahmad Qureshi on October 21, 2026, could have wider implications for families of people who lose their lives in road accidents while driving their own insured vehicles.
The Tribunal made the observations while deciding a compensation claim arising from the death of Syed Javed Nazir, an engineer who died in a road accident near Digdol in Ramban district on July 30, 2013, while driving his own Hyundai Santro car.
His wife, two minor daughters and parents had approached the Tribunal seeking compensation from Oriental Insurance Company Limited.
The central legal question was whether the deceased's family could claim compensation when the accident involved the insured vehicle's owner himself, rather than a third party.
Rejecting a restrictive interpretation of the insurance framework, the Tribunal held that the Motor Vehicles Act, being beneficial and social-welfare legislation, must be interpreted in a manner that enables eligible claimants to receive just compensation. It observed that the legal representatives of a deceased owner-cum-driver could maintain a claim against the insurer where the facts and applicable policy provisions supported such relief.
The Tribunal emphasised that the decisive consideration in the case was whether the deceased had been responsible for the accident. After examining the evidence, it concluded that the vehicle had gone out of control and plunged into a gorge, and that negligence on the part of the deceased had not been established.
The judgment also examined the relationship between statutory insurance requirements, the interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and additional personal accident cover for owner-drivers.
Importantly, the Tribunal's reasoning indicates that the absence of a separately purchased personal accident cover should not, by itself, be treated as an automatic bar to every claim by the legal heirs of a deceased owner-driver. The availability and extent of compensation, however, remain subject to the applicable statutory provisions, insurance policy and facts of each case.
The significance of the ruling lies in its potential to provide relief to families who might otherwise face difficulties in pursuing compensation simply because the deceased was driving his or her own vehicle at the time of the accident.
By adopting a broader interpretation of the law, the Tribunal has highlighted the need to examine eligible compensation claims on their individual merits rather than rejecting them solely on a narrow technical understanding of the owner-driver's status.
The decision may therefore be of considerable interest to vehicle owners, road accident victims and their families, as well as insurance companies dealing with claims arising from accidents involving insured vehicles.
.jpg)
Comment List