{"id":274358,"date":"2022-09-24T15:00:52","date_gmt":"2022-09-24T09:30:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=274358"},"modified":"2022-09-24T15:00:52","modified_gmt":"2022-09-24T09:30:52","slug":"karnataka-high-court-liability-of-insurance-company-to-compensate-be-absolved-when-driver-dies-of-heart-attack-parked-vehicle-time-of-death-tipper-lorry-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/24\/karnataka-high-court-liability-of-insurance-company-to-compensate-be-absolved-when-driver-dies-of-heart-attack-parked-vehicle-time-of-death-tipper-lorry-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Karnataka HC | Can Insurance Company’s liability be absolved in cases where the insured vehicle’s driver dies due to cardiac arrest while the vehicle was parked at the time of death?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

   <\/p>\n

Karnataka High Court<\/b>: While deciding the instant appeal wherein the issue was whether the liability of the Insurance Company is absolved in cases where the driver of an insured vehicle had died due to heart attack when such insured vehicle was not in use at the time of his death; the Bench of H.P Sandesh, J., observed that usage of vehicle does not mean that at the time of his death, the driver was necessarily driving the vehicle<\/i>. Since in casual connection of his employment, the driver was sleeping in the lorry and while taking a rest, suffered a heart attack, therefore this scenario would not absolve the Insurance Company from paying the compensation.<\/p>\n

Facts of the Case<\/b>: The deceased Eranna was working as a lorry driver with the respondent. In order to take some rest, he halted his vehicle near Idya village. It while taking rest that Eranna died due to cardiac arrest.<\/p>\n

Eranna’s legal representatives laid a claim before the Workmen’s Commissioner. The vehicle’s owner admitted to Eranna’s employment and to the fact that he died due to cardiac failure during the course of employment. The insurance company contested the claim and contended that Eranna’s death was not an accidental death and since he was taking intoxicating drugs, hence, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation as the same is not covered under the policy.<\/p>\n

Upon examining the claims, the Commissioner allowed the same and directed the Insurance Company to pay compensation of Rs. 3,03,620 with 12% interest. Aggrieved with the Award, the Insurance Company preferred the instant appeal.<\/p>\n

Contentions<\/b>: The counsels for the Insurance Company submitted that Eranna’s death is due to cardiac failure and the same is not a ground of usage of vehicle and the Commissioner was not justified in saddling liability on the insurer.<\/p>\n

It was further submitted that there were complaints lodged against the deceased stating that he was in the habit of indulging in intoxication every day and since the deceased was a habitual drinker, there is no liability on the employer to pay the compensation and there must be a causal connection between the death and the use of vehicle.<\/p>\n

Per- contra, the claimants presented the deceased’s post-mortem report which revealed that the deceased drove a tipper lorry, which is heavy vehicle and operating such vehicles are stress and heart attack inducing. It was contended that stress was the very nature of the deceased’s employment. The respondents also pointed out that the vehicle owner had not been examined.<\/p>\n

Observations and Decision-<\/b><\/p>\n