Back
High Court Of Delhi
N.N.KASHYAP - Appellant
Versus
RATTI RAM - Respondent
First Appeal Order 190 of 1973
Decided On : 07/11/1985
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT - SECTION 3 (5) (A) OF THE WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT - SECTION 110-A, 110-AA, 110-F OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT - INTERPRETATION - APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 3 (5) (A) OF THE WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT TO CLAIMS UNDER THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT - OPTION TO CLAIM COMPENSATION UNDER EITHER ACT BUT NOT UNDER BOTH - EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF CLAIMS TRIBUNAL UNDER THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant filed a claim for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act after receiving compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act. The Tribunal dismissed the claim, holding that the appellant could not claim compensation under both acts. The appellant challenged this decision, arguing that the Motor Vehicles Act Claims Tribunal was not a civil court within the meaning of section 3 (5) (a) of the Workmen's Compensation Act and that there was no bar to claiming compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act for an amount exceeding that granted under the Workmen's Compensation Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that section 3 (5) (a) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, when read with section 110-F of the Motor Vehicles Act, barred the appellant from claiming compensation under both acts. The court interpreted the words 'civil court' in section 3 (5) (a) of the Workmen's Compensation Act in a broad sense to include any legal forum, including the Claims Tribunal under the Motor Vehicles Act. The court also held that the object of both acts was to provide only one remedy for compensation and that this object would be defeated if multiple claims were allowed.
Issues: 1. Whether the Motor Vehicles Act Claims Tribunal is a civil court within the meaning of section 3 (5) (a) of the Workmen's Compensation Act. 2. Whether there is a bar to claiming compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act for an amount exceeding that granted under the Workmen's Compensation Act.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court interpreted the words 'civil court' in section 3 (5) (a) of the Workmen's Compensation Act in a broad sense to include any legal forum, including the Claims Tribunal under the Motor Vehicles Act. 2. The court held that the object of both the Workmen's Compensation Act and the Motor Vehicles Act was to provide only one remedy for compensation and that this object would be defeated if multiple claims were allowed.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant could not claim compensation under both the Workmen's Compensation Act and the Motor Vehicles Act.
( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,delhi, dated 31. 7. 1973. After making an award in favour of the appellant for a sum of Rs. 11,765. 00 the Tribunal dismissed the claim on the ground that appellant had already secured compensation of Rs. 7,560. 00 from the Commissioner, Workmen s Compensation. On interpretation of section 3 (5) (a) of the Workmen s Compensation Act the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the petition under section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act was not maintainable. It is this finding of the Tribunal which is challenged in this appeal;
( 2 ) SECTION 3 (5) (a) of the Workmen s Compensation Act, 1923 reads:
"3 (5) Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to confer any right to compensation on a workman in respect of any injury if he has instituted in a civil court a suit for damages in respect of the injury against the employer or any other person; and no suit for damages shall be maintainable by a workman in any court of law in respect of any injury- (a) If he has instituted a claim to compensation in respect of the injury before a Commissioner; or (b) If an agreement has been come to between the workman and his employer providing for the payment of compensation in respect of the injury in accordance with the provisions of this Act. "we may also note the relevant provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act. They are as follows:
"110-A. Application for compensation.- (1) An application for compensation arising out of an accident of the nature specified in sub-section (1) of section 110 may be made- (a) by the person who has sustained the injury; or (aa) by the owner of the property; or (b) Where death has resulted from the accident, by all or any of the legal representatives of the deceased; or (c) by any agent duly authorised by the person injured or all or any of the legal representatives of the deceased, as the case may be: Provided that where all the legal representatives of the deceased have not joined in any such application for compensation, the application shall be made on behalf of or for the benefit of all the legal representatives of the deceased and the legal representatives who have not so joined, shall be impleaded as respondents to the application. (2) Every application under sub-section (1) shall be made to the Claims Tribunal having jurisdiction over the area in which the accident occurred, and shall be in such form and shall contain such particulars as may be prescribed: Provided that where any claim for compensation under section 92-A is made in such application, the application shall contain a separate statement to that effect immediately before the signature of the applicant. (3) No application for such compensation shall be entertained unless it is made within six months of the occurrence of the accident: Provided that the Claims Tribunal may entertain the application after the expiry of the said period of six months if it is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause from making the application in time. 110-AA. Option regarding claims for compensation in certain cases.-Notwithstanding anything contained in the Workmen s Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923), where the death of or bodily injury to any person gives rise to a claim for compensation under this Act and also under Workmen s Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923) the person entitled to compensation may, without prejudice to the provisions of Chapter VII-A, claim such compensation under either of those Acts but not under both. 110-F. Bar of jurisdiction of civil courts.- Where any Claims Tribunal has been constituted for any area, no civil court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any question relating to any claim for compensation which may be adjudicated upon by the Claims Tribunal for that area. and no injunction in respect of any action taken or to be taken by or before the Claims Tribunal in respect of the claim for compensation shall be granted by the civil
AI
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
