Back
2015 Supreme(Del) 3559
DELHI HIGH COURT
G.P. Mittal, J.
Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Usha & Ors. - Resopndent
Mac. App. 707/2011
Decided On : 09-01-2015
For the Appellant :Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate.
For the Respondents No. 1 to 3:Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the acceptance of an offer made by an Insurance Company is crucial in determining the course of action for the Claims Tribunal in motor accident compensation cases.
Headnote:
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 - Section 166 - Section 163-A - Rule 3(2) - Rule 4(2) - Rule 6(3) - Rule 6(6)
Fact of the Case:
The Appellant challenges a judgment awarding compensation for a fatal motor vehicular accident. The Appellant contends that the offer made by the Insurance Company was not accepted by the claimants, and the Claims Tribunal erred in dispensing with the proof of negligence and proof of deceased's income in awarding the compensation.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that once the offer made by the Insurance Company was not accepted by the claimants, the Claims Tribunal had to proceed with the inquiry under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Court held that the Claims Tribunal acted illegally in passing the order and remanded the claim petition for a proper inquiry and decision in accordance with the law.
Issues: The issues revolved around the acceptance of the offer made by the Insurance Company, dispensing with the proof of negligence and deceased's income, and the legality of the Claims Tribunal's order.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court's decision was based on the interpretation of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, specifically Section 166 and Section 163-A, and the Agreed Procedure for handling motor vehicle accident cases. The Court emphasized that if the offer made by the Insurance Company is not accepted by the claimants, the Claims Tribunal must proceed with the inquiry as provided under Section 166 of the Act.
Final Decision: The Court set aside the order of the Claims Tribunal and remanded the claim petition for a proper inquiry and decision in accordance with the law. The parties were directed to appear before the Claims Tribunal for further proceedings.
G. P. Mittal, J. (Oral):--
1. The Appellant Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. impugns a judgment dated 10.03.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby a compensation of Rs. 11,92,600/- was awarded in favour of Respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 for the death of Pappu @ Puspender, who succumbed to fatal injuries suffered in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 23.08.2010.
2. The appellant’s grievance is that the offer given by the Appellant Insurance Company as per the Claims Tribunal’s agreed procedure was not accepted by the claimants. The only option available to the Claims Tribunal was to proceed with the inquiry in respect of the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. It is urged that the Claims Tribunal erred in dispensing with the proof of negligence and proof of deceased’s income in awarding the compensation.
3. The issue is covered by Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Asha Kalra (Smt). CM(M).749/2012 decided on 30.07.2012 and Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Smt. Reshnu Nisha & Ors., MAC.APP.503/2012 decided on 17.12.2012.
4. In Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Smt. Reshnu Nisha & Ors., MAC.APP.503/2012 decided on 17.12.2012, in paras 5 to 7 this Court held as under:
“5. This Court in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Asha Kalra (Smt.), CM (M) 749/2012 decided on 30th July, 2012 discussed the Claims Tribunal Agreed Procedure in great detail and held that if a legal offer given by an Insurance Company to the Claimant is accepted by him, the matter comes to an end and an order is required to be passed by the Claims Tribunal in view of the offer made by the Insurance Company and its acceptance by the Claimant. It was further held that where the legal offer given by Insurance Company is not accepted by the Claimant or where the Insurance Company has a defence available to it under the law, the DAR has to be inquired into as a Claim Petition under Section 166 or 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act), as the case may be.
6. Paras 8 to 13 of the Report in Asha Kalra (Smt.) are extracted hereunder:-
“8. As per Rule 3 (2) of the Agreed Procedure on receipt of the information about a motor vehicle accident, the Investigating Officer (IO) is required to intimate the factum of accident within 48 hours to the Claims Tribunal as also the Insurance Companies about the accident. The insurance particulars are to be intimated by the IO through e-mail. The factum of accident is required to be updated on the website of the Delhi Police.
9. Rule 4 (2) of the Agreed Procedure for the first time talks about the Nodal Officer of an Insurance Company. Rule 4 and Rule 6 talks about the Nodal Officer, nominated counsel and Designated Officer of the Insurance Company and the role assigned to them. To understand the scheme under the Agreed Procedure, I would like to extract Rule 4 and Rule 6 hereunder:-
“4 Preparation and forwarding of the Detailed Accident Report (DAR):
(1) After completion of the above collection and verification of the documents and investigation as may be required, the investigating police officer shall complete the preparation of a detailed accident report [hereinafter referred to as DAR] in Form “A” not later than thirty days from the date of the accident. In terms of Rule 3 (1)(c) such DAR shall be accompanied by requisite documents which shall include copy of the report under section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(2 of 1974), medico legal certificate, post-mortem report (in case of death), first information report, photographs, site plan, mechanical inspection report, seizure memo, photocopies of documents mentioned in Clause 3(2) above, as also a report regarding confirmation of genuineness thereof, if received, or otherwise action taken.
(2) Immediately on completion of the above DAR, the investigating police officer shall forward a copy of the DAR, under its seal, duly receipted:
(i) To the Claims Tribunal, unde
