Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Rep. By The Regional Manager. – Appellant
Versus
Uttam Sarma S/O- Late Adya Nath Sarma – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's procedural observations noted. (Para 1 , 7 , 9) |
| 2. claimants filed petitions for compensation. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. accident details and cause established. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. tribunal awarded compensation amount. (Para 8 , 10) |
| 5. court noted contribution to accident. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 6. compensation liability shared equally. (Para 14) |
JUDGMENT :
PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA, J.
1. Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel representing the appellants. Also heard Mr. M. Ahmed and Mr. N.J. Gogoi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. These batch of applications are under Section 173 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT challenging the judgment and award dated 21.09.2020 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.1, Kamrup (M) in MAC Case Nos.156/2017 & 157/2017.
3. The claimants Uttam Sarma and Mamoni Devi had filed the petition under Section 166 and 140 of the MV Act being MAC Case No.156/2017 claiming compensation on account of the death of their son Brajen Sarma.
4. Similarly, the claimants Kedar Ray and Ms. Moon Rai filed another petition under Section 166 and 140 of the M.V. Act being MAC Case No.157/2017 claiming compensation for the death of Arun Ray, the son of Kedar Ra
Court determines shared liability between vehicles involved in accident, holding insurance for both liable for compensation under Motor Vehicles Act.
The court established that under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, claimants are entitled to fixed compensation in fatal accidents without proving negligence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of negligence and contributory negligence in a motor vehicle accident, and the liability of the Insurance Company under the Motor....
Insurance policies prohibiting the carrying of passengers do not exempt liability if the policy holder fails to prove commercial intent in a case of passenger injury.
Compensation is justified under the Motor Vehicles Act if the accident arose from the use of a vehicle, even with indirect connections, and negligence must be established on the preponderance of prob....
Insurance company failed to prove claims regarding accident conditions, and court affirmed the Tribunal's compensation award based on lack of evidence.
Contributory negligence by the deceased reduced the compensation determined by the Tribunal from full to half, affirming joint liability for the accident.
Contributory negligence cannot be presumed from a head-on collision without supporting evidence; liability was assigned solely to the truck's insurer.
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
