SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Pat) 48

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
HEMANT GUPTA and SUDHIR SINGH, JJ.
M/S United India Insurance Company Limited - Appellant
Versus
Most. Mangli Devi & Ors. - Respondents
Miscellaneous Appeal No.419 of 2013
Decided On : 24-01-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Durgesh Kumar Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. Anjani Kumar, AAG-4, Mr. Shailendra Kumar, AC to AAG-4, Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the interchangeability of the terms 'judgment' and 'award' in the context of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Bihar Motor Vehicle Rules.

Headnote:

Award - Motor Vehicles Act - Section 168, Section 169, Rule 227, Rule 243 - The court clarified the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Bihar Motor Vehicle Rules, particularly addressing the interchangeability of the terms 'judgment' and 'award', and the payment of court fees by the tortfeasor.

Fact of the Case:

The court was tasked with clarifying the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Bihar Motor Vehicle Rules regarding the preparation of awards and the payment of court fees.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the terms 'judgment' and 'award' are interchangeable, and the tribunal should announce an award on completion of the inquiry, which shall be executable and appealable. It also ruled that the tortfeasor should pay the court fee, which would be recoverable as arrears of land revenue along with the compensation.

Issues: The issues revolved around the interpretation of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Bihar Motor Vehicle Rules, particularly regarding the nature of the tribunal's decision and the payment of court fees.

Ratio Decidendi: The court clarified that the terms 'judgment' and 'award' are interchangeable, and the tribunal should announce an award on completion of the inquiry. It also ruled that the tortfeasor should pay the court fee, which would be recoverable as arrears of land revenue along with the compensation.

Final Decision: The court held that the terms 'judgment' and 'award' are interchangeable, and the tribunal should announce an award on completion of the inquiry. It also ruled that the tortfeasor should pay the court fee, which would be recoverable as arrears of land revenue along with the compensation.

ORDER :

HEMANT GUPTA, J.

The matter has been placed before this Court in terms of an order passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court on 29.06.2016 wherein, it was noticed that an award has to be prepared in terms of Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “the Act”) and a copy of which is required to be served within fifteen days, however, no period has been assigned for the purpose of preparation of award under the Bihar Motor Vehicle Rules, 1992. The Rule 243 of the Bihar Motor Vehicle Rules, 1992 deals with judgment but not an award. Therefore, the matter was placed before this court to clarify the provisions.

2. The practice within the jurisdiction of this Court is that the Tribunal records its judgment and then calls upon the claimant to furnish the court fee and on furnishing of court fee, the Tribunal prepares an award which gives right of appeal to the aggrieved parties and also a right to the claimant to seek execution of the award.

3. On 13.01.2017, when the matter came up for hearing before the Division Bench, the Court framed two questions which required determination but after hearing learned counsel for the parties, we re-frame the questions, which require the adjudication. The questions are:-

(i) Whether in terms of Section 168, the reasons recorded by the Claims Tribunal for deciding the claim application itself is to be treated as an award and whether Rule 243 of the Bihar Motor Vehicles Rules, 1992 defining judgment would, in fact, mean an award.

(ii) Whether the fee payable on the claim application in terms of Rule 227 should be read down to mean that the fee payable on the claim application exceeding ten thousand rupees shall be payable by the tortfeasor not by the victim.

4. To examine the aforesaid two questions, certain statutory provisions need to be reproduced.

“Section 168: Award of the Claims Tribunal. – (1) On receipt of an application for compensation made under section 166, the Claims Tribunal shall, after giving notice of the application to the insurer and after giving the parties (including the insurer) an opportunity of being heard, hold an inquiry into the claim or, as the case may be, each of the claims and, subject to the provisions of section 162 may make an award determining the amount of compensation which appears to it to be just and specifying the person or persons to whom compensation shall be paid and in making the award the Claims Tribunal shall specify the amount which shall be paid by the insurer or owner or driver of the vehicle involved in the accident or by all or any of them, as the case may be :

Provided that where such application makes a claim for compensation under section 140 in respect of the death or permanent disablement of any person, such claim and any other claims (whether made in such application or otherwise) for compensation in respect of such death or permanent disablement shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Chapter X.

(2) The Claims Tribunal shall arrange to deliver copies of the award to the parties concerned expeditiously and in any case within a period of fifteen days from the date of the award.

(3) When an award is made under this section, the person who is required to pay any amount in terms of such award shall, within thirty days of the date of announcing the award by the Claims Tribunal, deposit the entire amount awarded in such manner as the Claims Tribunal may direct.

Section 169. Procedure and powers of Claims Tribunals.—(1) In holding any inquiry under Section 168, the Claims Tribunal may, subject to any rules that may be made in this behalf, follow such summary procedure as it thinks fit.

(2) The Claims Tribunal shall have all the powers of a Civil Court for the purpose of taking evidence on oath and of enforcing the attendance of witnesses and of compelling the discovery and production of documents and material objects and for such other purposes as may be prescribed; and the Claims Tribunal shall be deemed to be a Civ



























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top