Under Section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act, a claimant must elect between available remedies. Once a specific statute is chosen, the tribunal cannot apply criteria from a different act to compute compensation, nor can it bypass the requirement of proving negligence in fault-based claims.

JUDGMENT :

MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA, J.

1. Heard Mr. R. C. Paul, the learned counsel for the appellant Insurance Company. Also heard Mr. I. A. Talukdar, the learned counsel for the respondents /claimants.

2. This Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed by the Oriental Insurance Company Limited impugning the judgment and award dated 23.08.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagaon in the MAC Case No. 249/2006, whereby, the appellant was directed to pay a compensation amount of Rs. 20,17,856/- to the claimants along with an interest at the rate of 12% per annum.

3. The facts relevant for consideration of the instant appeal, in brief, are that one Sanjeev Saikia was a professional driver of the vehicle bearing Registration No. AS01Y5127 (Tata mobile pick-up van), which is a goods carrying vehicle. On 26.03.2006, some miscreants had hired the said vehicle with an intention to commit theft of the vehicle and when the vehicle was going towards Changjurai Potiapam reserve for loading vegetables, the miscreants killed the driver and the handyman and committed theft of the said vehicle. However, the villagers appeared at the place of occurrence and apprehended the two of the miscreants involved in the incident. In this regard, an FIR was lodged and Jamunamukh Police Station Case No. 5/2006 under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered.

4. Thereafter, the mother, the father and the widow of the deceased Sanjeev Saikia filed an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagaon, seeking compensation for death of their son/husband. The said case was registered as MAC Case No. 249/2006.

5. The present appellant contested the claims case by filing a written statement, wherein it took the usual defences which are available to Insurance Company under the law. It also took the plea of non-maintainability of the application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. Upon the pleadings of the parties, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal framed the following issues:

i. Whether the claim petition is maintainable?

ii. Whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle No. AS01Y5127 (mobile pick-up van)?

iii. Whether the claimant is entitled to receive compensation, and if so, to what extent and who is liable to pay the same?

iv. To what reliefs/reliefs are the parties entitled to?

6. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagaon, by judgment dated 11.03.2015, had dismiss the claim case filed by the claimants mainly on the ground that the claimants have failed to show any negligence or fault on the part of the driver or owner of the offending vehicle. Hence, it was held that they are not entitled to get relief under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988.

7. The Tribunal also held that as the annual income of the deceased was more than Rs. 40,000/- the claim case also cannot be converted into a case under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, in view of the clear bar to that effect laid down in law and clarified by the Apex Court in the case of “ Deepal Girishbhai Soni and Others Vs. United India Insurance Company Limited ” reported in (2004)