Hanumanagouda v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others
Background
A worker accompanying goods in a lorry for delivery died in an accident, and the tribunal awarded compensation to his widow and children against the owner and insurer. The High Court removed the insurer's liability because the worker was a clerk rather than someone loading or unloading goods. The lorry owner appealed, relying on the additional employment-risk coverage purchased under the policy.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court allowed the owner's appeal and restored the insurer's liability under the tribunal's award. The policy covered people employed in connection with vehicle operation as well as loading or unloading. A clerk accompanying the cargo for delivery fell within the wider operational category, so the High Court had read the clause too narrowly. The insurer was directed to deposit compensation and interest within eight weeks for withdrawal under the tribunal's order.
Lesson Learnt
Insurance coverage turns on the whole policy clause, not a narrow reading of one example within it. Here operational employees were covered even if their duties did not include physically loading the vehicle.