IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
Barin Ghosh,J.P. Singh, JJ.
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Som Raj & Ors. - Respondent
LPA(C) No. 1/2008, CMP No. 4/2008
Decided On : 04 April, 2009
Motor Vehicle Accident - Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 - Section 140, Section 141, Section 149, Section 165
Fact of the Case:
A claim was filed before the Claims Tribunal for a motor vehicle accident. The appellant contended that it had no liability and challenged the interim award. The Single Judge dismissed the appeal, holding that the Tribunal committed no error in fixing the liability on the appellant-insurer. The present appeal was filed against this judgment.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found in favor of the appellant, setting aside the judgment and order under appeal as well as the interim award, and remitted the matter to the Tribunal for further action.
Issues: The issues involved the liability of the appellant-insurer in a motor vehicle accident claim and the interpretation of relevant sections of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized that the liability of the insurer must be adjudged before any payment is made, and the defense put forward by the insurer under Section 149 of the Act must be considered. The Court also highlighted the priority of disposing of claims based on no fault liability and the requirement to follow the prescribed procedure.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant, without any order as to costs.
1. A motor vehicle accident resulted in filing of a claim before the Claims Tribunal. The foundation of the claim did not rest only on no fault liability. Before the Tribunal, the appellant before us, contended that it has no liability. The grounds in support of such contention had also been mentioned. The Tribunal, on consideration of the pleadings filed by the appellant, found that it had admitted insurance of the offending vehicle with it on the date of the accident. It also noted that various grounds had been taken by the appellant in defence and those were of legal nature. The Tribunal, thereupon, proceeded to decide the claim on the basis of no fault liability as a claim for interim compensation and awarded the same with the observation that the defences raised by the appellant shall be looked into and decided when the claim petition would be finally decided upon considering the evidence to be led by both sides. Challenging the award of the Tribunal, termed as interim award, the appellant filed an appeal. In the appeal, it was highlighted, as was contended before the Tribunal, that the driver of the vehicle, at the time of the accident, was not holding a valid driving license and, accordingly, the appellant had no liability on account of the claim. A learned Single Judge of this Court by the judgment and order under appeal, dismissed the appeal, holding that whether the driver had a valid driving license or not, is a question of fact which can be determined only during the trial of the case and that, at the time of considering the claim on the basis of no fault liability, the Tribunal was not required to go in for a roving enquiry. The learned Judge further held that when it was not in dispute that the vehicle stood insured with the appellant at the time of the accident, the Tribunal committed no error of law or fact in fixing the liability to pay the interim compensation upon the appellant-insurer. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the present appeal has been preferred.
2. Section 140 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 puts no fault liability on the owner of the vehicle. It provides that the amount of money mentioned in the said section is payable without pleading and establishing that the death or permanent disablement was due to any wrongful act, neglect or default of the owner or owners of the vehicle. It further says that the death or permanent disablement resulting from an accident arising out of use of a motor vehicle or motor vehicles would entail such payment and such claim, in terms of the provisions contained in the said section, is not defeatable by showing that there was a wrongful act, neglect or default of the person who suffered death or permanent disablement by reason of the motor vehicle accident. The section further makes it clear that the amount of compensation mentioned is the minimum compensation payable, although more than that may be payable under any other law for the time being in force. Section 141 of the Act makes it further clear that a claim for compensation under section 140, i.e., on the basis of no-fault, is in addition to claim for compensation on the principle of fault; but, at the same time, specifies that a claim on no fault basis shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible and, where such claim and additional claim has been made, the claim for compensation on the basis of no fault shall be disposed of in the first place.
3. The claim on the basis of no fault as also on the principle of fault can be lodged against the owner of the vehicle. The owner of the vehicle can pass off such liability to the insurer by taking out an insurance cover with third party risks, obtaining of which is mandatory. Sub-section (1) of section 149 of the Act directs the insurer, notwithstanding he may be entitled to avoid or cancel, or may have avoided or cancelled, the policy, subject to the provisions of section 149 of the Act, to pay, to the person entitled to the benefit of
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.