IMPORTANT POINT
A tortfeasor is ineligible for compensation under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, as it is designed for victims not responsible for the accident.

JUDGMENT :

Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the judgment and decree dated 24.09.2018 made in MCOP No.902 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (VI Small Causes Court), Chennai.

The instant appeal has been filed by the claimants whose claim petition came to be rejected under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, (herein after called as “Act”) and the claimants were granted compensation only under Section 140 of the Act to the tune of Rs.50,000/-

2. The claimants who are the wife and the children of the deceased Chandran filed the claim petition before the Tribunal on the ground that on 10.07.2011, when the deceased was riding his two wheeler towards Chengalpattu and at about 22:40 hours near Thirukazhukundram Road, an Auto was driven in a rash and negligent manner and it dashed against the two wheeler and thereby, the deceased sustained fatal injuries and he succumbed to the injuries. It is under these circumstances, the claimants filed the claim petition under Section 163A of the Act seeking for payment of compensation from the 2nd respondent Insurance Company in which the auto was insured.

3. The Tribunal on considering the facts and circumstances of the case and on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, came to a conclusion that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the deceased. The Tribunal further held that even though the claim petition has been filed under Section 163A of the Act, a tortfeasor cannot be granted compensation even under this provision. The Tribunal thereafter proceeded to invoke Section 140 of the Act and fixed the compensation of Rs.50,000/- Aggrieved by the Award passed by the Tribunal, the claimants have filed the present appeal before this Court.

4. Heard Mr.K.Varadhakamaraj, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent.

5. This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and also the materials available on record.

6. The crux of the arguments that was canvassed before this Court was that when a claim petition is filed under Section 163A of the Act, the issue of proving negligence becomes irrelevant and in the instant case, there is no dispute that the accident had taken place due to the collision between the auto rickshaw and the two wheeler and that fact by itself will be enough for the claimants to seek for compensation under Section 163A of the Act. To substantiate the submission, the judgment of this Court in Lakshmi and others vs. Metropolitan Transport Corporation Limited, Chennai-2 reported in 2011 1 TN MAC 410 was relied upon.

The learned counsel also made his submission on the scope of Section 163A of the

Act.

7. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that the Tribunal has come to a categoric conclusion that the deceased in this case was the tortfeasor and therefore, a person who has committed a wrong cannot be permitted to take advantage of his own wrong and Section 163A of the Act should not be applied in cases of this nature. The learned counsel submitted that the Tribunal had properly appreciated the facts of the case and has rightly come to a conclusion that the claimants will not be entitled for the payment of compensation under Section 163A of the Act and that the Award is not liable to be interfered by this Court.

8. The compensation payable under Section 163A of the Act is in a way an alternative to the determination of the compensation on the principle of fault liability. The object underlying the amendment that was brought into force in the year 1994 is to pay compensation without their being a long drawn litigation on the structured formulae basis and the legislature thought it fit to evolve a procedure of paying compensation without entering into the process of determining the fault.

9. The victim of an accident or his depe