Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
(AURANGABAD BENCH)
Vagyani B.B., Zoting D.S. Patil N.H., JJ.
Divisional Controller, M.s.r.t.c., Jalgaon .... Appellant.
Versus
Bapu Onkar Chaudhari.... Respondent.
First Appeal No. 815 of 2002, decided on 13-10-2003.
Advocates appeared :
P.K. Joshi, for appellant.
M.N. Nawandar, for respondent.
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections 140 and 173 - No-fault liability - Appeal against award of compensation passed under Section 140 - Award passed under Section 140 not appealable - Provisions of appeal made under Section 173 of Act not made applicable to claim arising out of no-fault liability - Tribunal not required to elaborate adjudication as is required under Section 166 of Act. - The tribunal, in order to award claim of compensation, if required, is empowered to collect information and documents for awarding compensation and after receipt of such information or documents, the Tribunal has to award the claim compensation. This is the special requirement made for the claim under Section 140 of the Act, taking into consideration its beneficial nature. Rule 280 is one of the adequate provisions made for enabling the tribunal to achieve satisfaction to award compensation under no-fault liability. Taking into consideration the nature of enquiry, the nature of the documents, the intention of the Legislature in introducing the beneficial legislation in the form of no-fault liability and the time limit prescribed for disposal of such application, the tribunal, on satisfying itself on the basis of documents which are required to be appended to the application under Section 140 of the Act, coupled with relevant rules, shall award claim compensation to the claimant. The element of elaborate adjudication or determination, as is required under Section 166 of the Act, is deliberately avoided.
Section 144 of the Act also speaks volume with regard to remedy of appeal. Sections 140 to 144 are clubbed together under Chapter X of the Act. Fault claims contemplated under Section 166 of the Act fall under Chapter XII of the Act. The claim with regard to payment of compensation on structured formula basis falls in Chapter XI. Section 173 of the Act, which speaks about appeals, falls in Chapter XII of the Act. If Sections 165 to 176 are considered together, it prima facie appears that the award passed after elaborate adjudication under Section 168 of the Act in case of fault claim under Section 166 of the Act, is only made appealable under Section 173 of the Act. So far as claims decided under no-fault liability are concerned, the express remedy of appeal is not provided either in the Act or rules. It is made beyond doubt clear by Section 144 of the Act that the provisions of Chapter X shall have overriding effect notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of the Act or of any other law for the time being in force. The conjoint reading of all the provisions of the Act and the rules would clearly indicate that the provisions of appeal made under Section 173 of the Act falling in Chapter XII of the Act is not made applicable to the claims arising out of Chapter X.
There is no specific provision given under the Act which empowers an aggrieved person to file an appeal against the order passed under Section 140 of the Act.
The award passed under Section 140 of the Act is not an appealable award under Sections 166 and 168 read with Section 173 of the Act.
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections 140, 168 and 173 - Maharashtra Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, Rule 281 - Award - Passed under Section 140 of Act - Not an appealable award - Award contem- plated under Rule 281 not an appealable award - Award passed under Section 168 of Act - Only appealable. - Section 173 of the Act speaks about an award passed by a Claims Tribunal by which right of appeal is provided to a person aggrieved by such an award. The award passed under Section 168 of the Act is an award in strict sense of the term and, therefore, naturally the person aggrieved by such an award can prefer an appeal under Section 173 of the Act. An award as contemplated under Rule 281 of the Rules does not become an appealable award. A mere nomenclature of award as used in Rule 281 does not make the order passed by the Claims Tribunal under Section 140 of the Act an award giving rise to appeal under Section 173 of the Act. A person aggrieved by the award passed under Section 168 of the Act can only prefer an appeal under Section 173 of the Act and none else.
Maharashtra Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 - Rules 54 and 54-A - Rule 281 - Right to appeal - No fault liability. - In absence of specific right of appeal a person does not get a right of appeal as there is no inherent right of appeal as it is creature of statute.
2. A passenger bus bearing No. MH-20/D-1831 belonging to the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Jalgaon met with an accident on 22-11-1997 near village Kekat Nimbhora. One Bapu Onkar Chaudhari, a passenger in the said bus, sustained several injuries resulting into permanent physical disability. He filed an application under section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Jalgaon. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalgaon allowed the application by order dated 2-3-2002 and directed the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Jalgaon to pay Rs. 25,000/- to the injured, within one month.
3. Feeling aggrieved by the Award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalgaon, the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation filed First Appeal No. 815 of 2002 under section 173 of the Act. When the said first appeal came up for admission before Single Judge, the Single Judge expressed doubt about maintainability of the appeal. Therefore, by order dated 28-8-2002, a reference was recommended to the larger Bench on the point of maintainability of the first appeal. The Honble the Chief Justice was pleased to direct the appeal to be placed before Division Bench.
4. After hearing the elaborate submissions of the learned Counsel for the respective parties, the Division Bench failed to persuade itself to the view taken by Bench of five Honble Judges of Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of (Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Chintaman and others)1, 1995 A.C.J. 225. By unanimous decision, the larger Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court held that an order granting compensation under section 140 of the Act amounts to an Award within the meaning of section 168 of the Act and, therefore, an appeal would lie under section 173 of the Act.
5. The Division Bench took into consideration the relevant provisions of the Act and the Maharashtra Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) and thought it fit to refer the matter for consideration by a larger Bench. This is how, the matter is referred to the Full Bench to determine the following questions :
(1) Whether an order passed in an application under section 140 of the Act can be termed as an Award under section 166 of the Act so as to enable the aggrieved party to challenge it in an appeal under section 173 and
(2) Whether against the order passed by the MACT in an application under section 140 of the Act granting compensation on no fault liability, an appeal would lie to the High Court?
6. Shri P.K. Joshi, learned Counsel for the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Jalgaon submitted that in view of Rule 281 of the Rules, the order passed under section 140 of the Act is an Award and, therefore, appeal would lie under section 173 of the Act. Whereas the learned Counsel Shri Nawandar for the original claimant submitted that an order passed under section 140 of the Act directing the payment of compensation cannot be termed as an Award, within the meaning of section 168 of the Act and, therefore, an appeal under section 173 of the Act is not maintainable.
7. We gave anxious consideration to the rival submissions made at the Bar. Before adverting directly to the main issue, we would like to take into consideration the views expressed by different High Courts in this regard. Majority of the High Courts have taken a view that an order passed under no fault liability is an Award and, therefore, an appeal under section 173 of the Act is maintainable. Following High Courts have taken in view that an order passed under section 140 of the Act is an Award and, therefore, an appeal under section 173 of the Act is maintainable :
1. (Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mohiuddin Kureshi)2, 1994 A.C.J. 74 (Division Bench of Patna High Court) 2. (United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Padmavathy and others)3, 1990 A.C.J. 751 (Division Bench of Kerala High Co
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
