[Yesterdaysnews]

I was wondering - if we hit an animal and it doesn’t die and we get it treated at a registered veterinary hospital- can the expenses be claimed under 3rd party insurance?

Has any one had any experience doing so please?

[condor]

I dont think so, though cattle are otherwise considered as property of a person.

TP insurance is to be able to cover the damages faced by the other party (people / their vehicle) in an accident. Insurance companies will mostly cover only the vehicle and the people and not even their belongings in their vehicle. When we see this part, animals/cattle of the opposite party would not be covered under the TP coverage.

[Yesterdaysnews]

Any injury caused to 3rd parties must be covered. So are not animals 3rd party?

[Rodie09]

I recently read somewhere that even the damage to another vehicle cannot be claimed through TP - its only for non vehicle property damage. Not sure on the authenticity of that though.
Can anyone comment?
Also is there any upper cap on the liability and how is it calculated?

[condor]

Originally Posted by Yesterdaysnews

So are not animals 3rd party?

For a person having a pet in the house, the pet is family - because the person treats the pet that way. Insurance coverage (can) include un-named passengers. i.e., people who are travelling in the vehicle. They will not consider a pet as a passenger with this definition.

If you still want to ask on this line, do first check your entire policy if it includes pets anywhere in the covered passengers part - or better still, call your insurance provider and ask.

[Athani]

Any damage to property or person of annother arising from use of the vehicle is covered by third party insurance. Since animals are considered property of their owners, their treatment would be covered and so would damages in case of death.

[McLaren Rulez]

Forget pets, has anyone claimed third party insurance for human injuries from any accident here? If so, what is the process?

[thanixravindran]

I believe FIR is mandatory to claim third party damages. And either the third party or their legal heir can make the claim. For humans and property, it is easy due to legality of ownership can be established.

For animals, it may be tricky. I believe in case of pet injury, insurance may ask for proof of ownership like a licensed pet. And one has to prove it is due to non negligence from pet owner like a dog out of leash in public road. One can't claim for stray animals as there is no proof of ownership.

Motor vehicle accident tribunal I believe is for cases for not agreeing on compensation amount offered by insurance.

[NomadSK]

Originally Posted by McLaren Rulez

Forget pets, has anyone claimed third party insurance for human injuries from any accident here? If so, what is the process?

I don’t have a clear/exact picture. A decade back, known person to me had hit the pedestrian and he had got severe bodily injuries, thankfully survived. Police case/FIR was done. A claim was filed before the Motor accidents Claims Tribunal (by the injured person's lawyer). A claim before “Claims Tribunal” is neither a criminal case nor a civil case. The case went on for few years and the court finally decided for a compensation amount and the insurance company had to pay the damages to the injured person.

What I understood from the whole scenario is that Law is too complicated in such matters for a normal person to deal with.

The following four types of cases can give rise to claims for compensation:

(1) Claims for compensation in cases where it is alleged that motor vehicle driver was solely responsible for causing accidental injuries giving rise to the claims for compensation.

(2) Claims for compensation in cases of accidents where it is alleged that accident is caused not on account of rash or negligent driving of driver of the motor vehicle causing the accidental injuries or who might have been solely responsible for the accident even otherwise.

(3) Claims for compensation in case where it is alleged that the accident giving rise to the claim is being the result of composite negligence not only of the driver of the motor vehicle but who might be found negligent contributing to the causing of the accident, meaning thereby, claims for compensation against joint tort-feasors, one of which at least is the driver of a motor vehicle.

(4) Cases where it is alleged that accidental injuries have been caused on account of composite negligence of driver of the motor vehicle as well as any other person who might be jointly responsible for causing the accident. But when ultimately, on evidence, it is found by the Tribunal that driver of the motor vehicle was not at all responsible, not even to the slightest extent and that sole responsibility for causing of the accident rested on the shoulders of the driver of the vehicle which is not a motor vehicle or on the shoulders of any other agency.

Only the cases falling under first and third categories can effectively be tried by the Claims Tribunal and proper awards can be passed against the concerned parties while in cases falling under second and fourth categories, claim petitions will have to be rejected either at the threshold or on merits on the ground of absence of jurisdiction either initial jurisdiction to entertain such claim petitions or ultimate jurisdiction to pass awards against such outsiders, as the case may be.

[GTO]

Any kind of claims under 3rd-party insurance are extremely long drawn, tedious & cumbersome. This is by design (by the insurance companies) and a large chunk end up in court. I have usually seen people pressing through the long process only when there is loss of life / disability and the amounts are thus significant.

Else, people usually use their own insurance or pay up themselves.

[Yesterdaysnews]

Thanks for the replies.

Where I came from is really if we or someone else runs over a stray animal, and we rush it to the vet, could we ask for the insurance to cover hospitalisation.

Because if yes, perhaps a lot more of us would be more willing to help a stray animal in distress. Vets are quite expensive nowadays and free shelters that offer care and medicine are overloaded.

[locusjag]

Well, isn't there a separate coverage available for third party property and and another one for third party bodily injury? The law makes the latter mandatory (rightly so) and the former is optional. Animals owned by any affected 3rd parties should be covered by the former coverage.

[thanixravindran]

Originally Posted by locusjag

Well, isn't there a separate coverage available for third party property and and another one for third party bodily injury? The law makes the latter mandatory (rightly so) and the former is optional. Animals owned by any affected 3rd parties should be covered by the former coverage.

No, it is not optional. Only difference is claim amount.

For physical injury or death, the claim amount is unlimited. For property damage, there is a limit of 7.5L from third party insurance. Earlier it was also unlimited but was changed some years ago by IRDAI. If the property damage exceeds the limit, it shall be recovered from the vehicle owner.

[locusjag]

Originally Posted by thanixravindran

No, it is not optional. Only difference is claim amount.

For physical injury or death, the claim amount is unlimited. For property damage, there is a limit of 7.5L from third party insurance. Earlier it was also unlimited but was changed some years ago by IRDAI. If the property damage exceeds the limit, it shall be recovered from the vehicle owner.

Yeah you're right. It turns out that in India third party coverage bundles bodily injury/death and property damage to third parties. I never knew that; obviously I was under the impression that only third party bodily injury coverage is mandatory...

[NetfreakBombay]

Originally Posted by Yesterdaysnews

I was wondering - if we hit an animal and it doesn’t die and we get it treated at a registered veterinary hospital- can the expenses be claimed under 3rd party insurance?

Like most legal questions, answer is never black and white. We can consider two extremes :

1. Pet dog / cat or stray animal
2. "Revenue Generating" Asset like cow or goat

Courts have been pretty clear on scenario #1, it does not attract acts under MACT (even though offences under cruelty to animals might still apply). Example : https://economictimes.indiatimes.com...w/95165641.cms

Scenario #2 : in this case animal is treated as any other asset.

At the time of accident, the cows were SCCH-19 hale and healthy and yielding milk and the petitioner was doing the business and earning suitably and the said milk of the cows are sole earnings of the petitioner. Due to the death of cows the petitioner is undergoing great mental agony, hardship and financial difficulties. ..

SCCH-19 ORDER (Vide separate judgment) The petition filed under Sec.166 of Motor Vehicles Act by the petitioner is partly allowed with costs The petitioner is awarded with compensation of Rs.60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand only) with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization.

The respondents No. 1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation with interest to the petitioner.

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/173052441/