Back
S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR
Sunil – Appellant
Versus
Balasaheb Baburao Ashtekar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.G. Chapalgaonkar, J.
The appellant/original claimant impugns the judgment and award dated 8.11.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kopargaon in M.A.C.T. No. 28 of 2005, by which the claim for compensation under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act has been dismissed by the tribunal.
2. Mr. A.S. Gandhi, learned advocate for the appellant/claimant submits that claimant was employed as a driver of a rickshaw bearing registration No. MH-17/K-7288, owned by respondent No.1. On 29.8.2004, while he was driving rickshaw, it turned turtle due to bad condition of road. He suffered fracture of right lower Rib. Despite medical assistance, permanent disablement to the extent of 25% subsists. He had, therefore, lodged MACP No. 28 of 2005 before the tribunal under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, raising the claim for compensation from owner and insurer of the rickshaw. However, the tribunal dismissed the claim petition, holding that the claimant does not fall within the meaning of the term "victim" in terms of Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act and cannot claim compensation towards injuries suffered in an accident occurred due to his own fault.
3. Mr. Gandhi
A driver can maintain a claim for compensation under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, irrespective of negligence, as established by the Supreme Court.
Accident claim - Vehicle driven by the claimant is covered by package policy with Limited liability for Personal Accident cover of owner driver. The claimant as paid employee under the owner of the v....
It cannot be recognized as an absolute proposition of law that a third party passenger in a hired vehicle can only claim compensation from owner/insurer of offending vehicle.
A claimant must be a third party to maintain a claim under Section 163-A of the M.V. Act; a driver cannot claim compensation for injuries sustained while driving their own vehicle.
Point of law : The object for incorporating sub-section (2) in Section 163-A of Act is, that burden of pleading and establishing proof of "wrongful act", "neglect" or "default" would not rest on the ....
Point of law: liability under Section 163A of the Act is on the owner of the vehicle as a person cannot be both, a claimant as also a recipient and, therefore, the heirs of the owner could not have m....
Under Section 163(A) of the Motor Vehicles Act, insurers cannot raise the defense of negligence against claimants, the deceased cannot be treated as a third party if they are related to the vehicle's....
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
