7 of 11

Disagree

Write now Article Tools

This is a statement that emanates from a common man's point of view and we can rather say from a layman's point of view.The insurance that we actually refer to here is the auto insurance which is specifically meant for covering the damages incurred by a vehicle in the course of an accident whether it is caused by the driver who is driving the vehicle by virtue of his negligence or contributory negligence or by the driver of an another vehicle who causes the accident.

In order to have a clear understanding of the issue, whether the insurance is required for the driver or the vehicle, we have to discuss the issue from a practical point of view.Suppose the vehicle that we refer to is a lorry and it is driven by its driver rather rashly with negligence or in a drunken state and causes the accident by dashing it against a passenger bus whose driver also contributes his own negligence to cause the accident.In the result of the accident, the front portion of the lorry is badly damaged including the engine and only the back portion of the lorry remains undamaged.The driver of the lorry succumbs to the grievous injuries he sustained in the accident.

Now we have to analyse the remedies available for the lorry as well as the deceased driver.The driver is a driver only when he drives the vehicle and he has a number of avenues to get himself insured.He can take a number of insurance policies like medical insurance and life insurance etc, to safeguard his family in case of his death.Moreover, in case of his death due to the above said motor vehicle accident, his legal heirs can claim compensation through workman's compensation act, in which the provisions are very favourable to a workman.In the driver's case notwithstanding his negligence that caused the accident, his legal heirs are entitled to claim compensation from the owner of the lorry, since the driver is defined as a worker or an employee of the owner of the lorry.

But the heavy loss caused to the vehicle (lorry) which has been badly damaged in the accident can be compensated only through the vehicle insurance and not by any other means.One should also consider the dilemma sufferred by the owner of the vehicle.On the one hand he has to pay compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased driver under the workman's compensation act, since the driver is an employee in the course of the accident.On the other hand he has to repair the damages caused to the vehicle in the course of the accident.The vehicle insurance is the only remedy. That too not available immediately.The vehicle owner has to make a complaint about the accident to the police station and an FIR has to be registered.Then the vehicle owner has to inform the details of the accident to the insurance company.The insurance company in turn will issue a claim form to the vehicle owner for making his claim, besides deputing a surveyor to assess the actual damages sustained by the vehicle in the accident.Only after completing all the above mentioned formalities, the insurance company may allow the claim partly or fully as assessed and certified by the surveyor.

Therefore, the vehicle insurance is the only remedy that will rescue the vehicle owner atleast to some extent for the damages sufferred by the vehicle in the course of an accident.Whereas, in case of death of the vehicle driver or his legal heirs have other avenues to get themselves compensated in case of an accident.Therefore, it is disagreed that the insurance should be required for the driver not the vehicle.

Learn more about this author, Ramalingam Subramaniam.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Insurance should be required for the driver not the vehicle?
We want to hear your view. Write now!