Back
2022 Supreme(SC) 1820
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Surya Kant, J.B. Pardiwala, JJ.
Visalatchi & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Nagarajan & Anr. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 5920 of 2022 (Arising Out of SLP(C) No. 15866 of 2020)
Decided On : 01-09-2022
Mr. Ashwani Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. D.Kumanan, Advocate, Mr. Sheikh Fakhruddin Kalia, Advocate, for the Respondent.
The court emphasized the importance of effectively determining the compensation required to be awarded in motor accident claims.
Headnote:
Compensation - Motor Accident Claims - Section 304-A IPC - M.A.C.T.O.P.No.232/2004 - The court found that the Tribunal and the High Court did not effectively determine the compensation required to be awarded. The orders of the Tribunal and the High Court were set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to adjudicate the claim afresh.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were aggrieved by the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Karaikal, which awarded a meagre compensation to them for the death of Swaminathan in a motor accident. Their appeal against this order was dismissed by the High Court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Tribunal and the High Court did not effectively determine the compensation required to be awarded. The orders of the Tribunal and the High Court were set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to adjudicate the claim afresh.
Issues: Ineffectiveness of the determination of compensation by the Tribunal and the High Court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the failure of the Tribunal and the High Court to effectively determine the compensation required to be awarded.
Final Decision: The orders of the Tribunal and the High Court were set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to adjudicate the claim afresh.
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants are aggrieved by the order dated 04.02.2020 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras whereby their appeal against the order dated 29.12.2006 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Karaikal (for short, 'the Tribunal') in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.232/2004 has been dismissed.
3. The above-stated Claim Petition arose out of the death of one Swaminathan, who while riding on his motorcycle Hero Honda Splendor Plus bearing Reg.No.TN 50 - C 2064 on 04.09.2004 at 9.00 P.M. was allegedly hit by CRC Load Van bearing Reg.No.TM 51-5107, which came from the opposite direction. Swaminathan sustained severe injuries on his right side neck, shoulder and right side leg. Immediately, he was taken to the Government Hospital, Karaikal but it was too late and he was declared dead. A case - Cr.No.125 of 2004 was registered at the Police Station Pattinam under Section 304-A IPC. The deceased was 32 years' old. The appellants who claim to be dependents on the deceased filed a Claim Petition which was allowed by the Tribunal to the extent that a meagre compensation of Rs.52,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% was awarded to the appellants. They went in appeal before the High Court but unfortunately their appeal was dismissed.
4. Having perused the material placed on record, we find that neither the Tribunal nor the High Court have gone into the question as to how the compensation was required to be determined. Needless to say that the issues to be determined have not been effectively decided by the Tribunal on consideration of the material on record. We are, thus, constrained to set aside the orders dated 29.12.2006 passed by the Tribunal in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.232/2004 as well as the High Court dated 04.02.2020 passed in C.M.A.No.1672/2010. The matter is remitted to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Karaikal to adjudicate the claim afresh in the light of the observations made hereinabove. The Tribunal shall decide the matter within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
5. It is clarified that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the same shall be decided by the Tribunal. It is further made clear that whatever amount of compensation was granted earlier, shall not be reduced or recovered from the appellants.
6. The parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 27.09.2022.
7. The appeal stands disposed of in above terms.
8. As a sequel to the above, pending interlocutory applications also stand disposed of.
