Today(on May 13th),Supreme Court discusses balancing PUC compliance and insurance for vehicles, considering modification of ruling barring insurance for vehicles without valid PUC certificates at renewal.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Today(on May 13th), The Supreme Court of India deliberated on the importance of balancing compliance with pollution under control (PUC) norms for vehicles with the requirement for third-party insurance coverage. Justices A S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan discussed an application seeking modification of a previous ruling dated August 10, 2017. This ruling mandated that insurance companies should not insure vehicles without a valid PUC certificate at the time of policy renewal.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the General Insurance Council, elaborated on the legal backdrop underpinning this issue. He referenced sections 146 and 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which respectively outline the necessity for insurance against third party risks and the specifications for insurance policies and liability limits.
Justice Bhuyan highlighted the intricate relationship between pollution control and insurance coverage. He underscored the 2017 Supreme Court decision that directly linked PUC certification with the eligibility for third party insurance.
ALSO READ: SC Stays NGT’s Directive and Questions Jurisdiction in Waris Chemicals Case
Mehta stressed the consequence of this linkage, stating-
“What occurs is that due to the lack of PUC, 55 percent of vehicles, as per our survey, are uninsured,” he elaborated. “According to a survey by the Government of India, 55 percent of vehicles are uninsured, meaning that if they are involved in an accident, the victims do not receive compensation.”
Mehta advocated for stringent adherence to PUC norms, suggesting that vehicles without a valid PUC should not even be refueled. Amidst these discussions, Senior Advocate Aparajita Singh, serving as an amicus curiae, proposed that the issue be referred to the Commission of Air Quality Management (CAQM), an expert body adept at handling such matters.
Echoing the need for a balanced approach, the bench collectively noted-
“We must find a middle ground between the two. Ensuring pollution control is essential, and the absence of third-party insurance for many vehicles presents a significant issue in case of accidents.”
Further delving into the complications arising from the existing regulations, Mehta pointed out that many vehicle owners might be financially incapable of compensating accident victims if their vehicles were uninsured. This stark reality enhances the potential hardships for accident claimants, as emphasized by the bench’s observation.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court of India Calls for Accountability of Advocates on Record (AoRs)
The justices concurred, stating-
“Prima facie, we believe it’s essential to strike a balance, ensuring vehicles adhere to PUC norms while also ensuring all vehicles have third-party insurance.”
The application is scheduled for further consideration on July 15th.
