Back
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Harbans Singh and Bal Raj Tuli JJ.
Damyanti Devi And Others
Versus
Sita Devi And Others
F.A.O. No. 24 of 1969,
Decided On : NOVEMBER 19, 1971
The judgment deals with the determination of compensation payable to the legal representatives of a person who died in a motor vehicle accident. It discusses the relevant provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1956, and the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855, and their interpretation by various courts. The court held that the Motor Vehicles Act provides a comprehensive framework for adjudicating claims arising from motor vehicle accidents, including compensation for loss of life or injuries. It also held that the Fatal Accidents Act is not applicable to such claims, and that the principles evolved under that Act can be applied to claims under the Motor Vehicles Act while determining the amount of compensation. The court further held that the compensation should be determined based on the loss suffered by the estate of the deceased, which is to be distributed among the legal representatives according to their dependency or necessity. The court also considered various factors such as the age of the deceased, their income, and the dependency of the legal representatives in determining the amount of compensation.
Fact of the Case:
Manohar Lal, a scooter rider, died in an accident caused by the rash and negligent driving of a truck driver. His legal representatives, including his widowed mother and three minor children, filed an application for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1956.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the Motor Vehicles Act provides a comprehensive framework for adjudicating claims arising from motor vehicle accidents, including compensation for loss of life or injuries. It also held that the Fatal Accidents Act is not applicable to such claims, and that the principles evolved under that Act can be applied to claims under the Motor Vehicles Act while determining the amount of compensation. The court further held that the compensation should be determined based on the loss suffered by the estate of the deceased, which is to be distributed among the legal representatives according to their dependency or necessity.
Issues: 1. Whether the claim for compensation under section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act has to be filed as is prescribed in the Fatal Accident Act, 1855, or without any reference to that Act. 2. Whether the value of the assets received by the appellants should be deducted out of the compensation payable to them. 3. Whether any deduction should be made out of the amount of compensation determined on account of lump sum payment.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Motor Vehicles Act provides a comprehensive framework for adjudicating claims arising from motor vehicle accidents, including compensation for loss of life or injuries. The Fatal Accidents Act is not applicable to such claims, and the principles evolved under that Act can be applied to claims under the Motor Vehicles Act while determining the amount of compensation. 2. The value of the assets received by the legal representatives of the deceased should not be deducted out of the compensation payable to them, unless such assets were being used for the benefit of the family during the lifetime of the deceased and their user has not changed after his death. 3. No deduction should be made out of the amount of compensation determined on account of lump sum payment, especially when the amount is being paid after a significant delay and the claimants have been deprived of the compensation for a substantial period.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal and decreed the claims of the appellants for a sum of Rs. 43,200.00 to be divided amongst them in the following proportions: Mrs. Puran Devi (widow): Rs. 15,000.00 Swarna Devi (daughter): Rs. 4,000.00 Surender Kumar (son): Rs. 2,200.00 Braham Datt (son): Rs. 4,000.00 Santosh Kumari (daughter): Rs. 8,000.00 Vijay Bala (daughter): Rs. 10,000.00 The amount received or to be received from the insurance company was also to be divided in the same proportion. The appellants were also awarded costs of the appeal, to be paid by the insurance company.
1. This judgment will dispose of F.A.O. 24 of 1969, L.P.A. 303 of 1967, L.P.A. 258 of 1970 L.P.A. 274 of 1970 and L.P.A. 287 of 1970, as they havebeen heard together owing to the fact that some questions of law arising in these cases are common.
2. The facts of F.A.O. 24 of 1969 are that one Manohar Lal died in an accident on January 8,1966, and his legal representatives, namely, widowed mother and three minor children, filed an application claiming compensation of Rs. 1,11,000.00, the details of which are as under :
1. Rs. 1,00,000.00 for the loss of life of the said Manohar Lal; 2. Rs. 1,000.00 for medical treatment and other religious rituals ; and 3. Rs. l0,000.00 for agony, harassment, pain, mental torture and worry.
3. Manohar Lal was going on a scooter when truck No. PNG-5202 dashed against him. The truck was going at such a great speed that Manohar Lal died on the spot and his scooter was also damaged. It was found by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District and Sessions Judge, Gurgaon) (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the truck by its driver. The applicants were held to be the legal heirs of Manohar Lal, but they were denied any compensation on the ground that they had received assets of the value exceeding Rs 90,000,00 on the death of the deceased. As a result thereof, the application was dismissed on December 9, 1968. Mrs. Dhanni Bai, widowed mother of the deceased, died on December 16,1968, and the present appeal is on behalf of the widow and the three children of the deceased.
4. The details of the assets are a factory of the value of Rs. 80,000.00 which was being run by the deceased and was his source of livelihood, a house valued at Rs. 6,000.00 and insurance amount of Rs. 8,000.00. The learned Tribunal came to the finish that the deceased was contributing Rs. 150.00 per mensem for the maintenance of his family and, although he was only 37 years of age at the time of his death, the compensation was calculated for a period of fifteen years only at the rate of Rs. 150.00 per mensem, that is, Rs. 27,030.00 in all. The appellants have challenged the finding with regard to the quantum of compensation recorded by the learned Tribunal as well as the finding that the appellants were not entitled to receive any compensation on account of the assets of the deceased having been received by them as his heirs.
5. The first point for determination is whether the claim under section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act has to be filed as is prescribed in the Fatal Accident Act, 1855, or without any reference to that Act. This Act was enacted, as the preamble shows, to provide compensation to families for loss occasioned by the death of a person caused by actionable wrong as prior thereto no action or suit was maintainable in any Court against a person who, by his wrongful act, neglect or default, might have caused the death of another person. Section 110 of the Motor Vehicles Act was amended and sections 110-A to 110-F were added by the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 100 of 1956, in order to provide a summary and cheap remedy to the legal representatives of a person whose death is caused in an accident with a motor vevicle as also to adjudicate upon the claims of the persons receiving injuries in such accidents. It was held by a Division Bench of the Madras High Court in Mohammed Habibullah and another v. K. Seethammal, 1966 A.C.J. 346,that
"the Legislature has deliberately enacted the Motor Vehicles Act, and provided by virtue of sections 110 to 110-F of that Act, not merely a self-contained code for the adjudication of claims to compensation on behalf of the victims of a motor accident, but also a complete machinery for the adjudication of such claims. Under section 110-F, the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is specifically ousted by the Claims Tribunal for the area. The claim in "the present case is under sections 110 to 110-F of the M
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
