SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1968 Supreme(P&H) 185

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
R.S.Narula and R.S.Sarkaria JJ.
Municipal Committee, Jullundur City
Versus
Romesh Saggi
First Appeal Order No. 125 of 1963,
Decided On : DECEMBER 11, 1968

The judgment of a Criminal Court in a prosecution arising out of a motor accident is not conclusive or binding on the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal dealing with a claim petition under Section 110-C of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Headnote:

MOTOR VEHICLES ACT - S. 110-D - APPEAL - QUESTION WHETHER JUDGMENT OF CRIMINAL COURT IN PROSECUTION ARISING OUT OF MOTOR ACCIDENT DETERMINING GUILT OR INNOCENCE OF DRIVER OF MOTOR VEHICLE CONCERNED IS CONCLUSIVE AND BINDING ON MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL DEALING WITH CLAIM PETITION UNDER S. 110-C OF THE ACT - HELD, JUDGMENT OF CRIMINAL COURT IS NEITHER CONCLUSIVE NOR BINDING ON MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AND ITS FINDINGS AS TO GUILT OR OTHERWISE OF DRIVER ARE WHOLLY IRRELEVANT FOR PURPOSE OF TRIAL ON MERITS OF CLAIM PETITION BEFORE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL - SUCH JUDGMENT CAN HOWEVER BE RELEVANT ONLY FOR PURPOSE AND TO EXTENT SPECIFIED IN S. 43 OF EVIDENCE ACT.

Fact of the Case:

In this appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act (4 of 1939), as subsequently amended by Act 100 of 1956, against an award, dated March 19, 1963, for Rs. 6,750.46 P. and costs, it was argued on behalf of the judgment-debtor appellant before Gurdev Singh, J., that the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hold that Raghbir Singh, the driver of the alleged offending vehicle was guilty of any rash or negligent act as Raghbir Singh had already been acquitted by this Court on August 14, 1961 (in Criminal Revision No. 312 of 1961) of the charge of rashness or negligence in respect of the same accident which gave rise to the claim under Section 110-A of the Act.

Finding of the Court:

The judgment of a Criminal Court in a prosecution arising out of a motor accident, determining the guilt or innocence of the driver of the motor vehicle concerned, is neither conclusive nor binding on the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, dealing with a claim petition under Section 110-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, and its findings as to the guilt or otherwise of the driver are wholly irrelevant for the purpose of the trial on merits of the claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. Such judgment can however, be relevant only for the purpose and to the extent specified in Section 43 of the Evidence Act.

Issues: Whether the judgment of a criminal Court in a prosecution arising out of a motor accident, determining the guilt or innocence of the driver of the motor vehicle concerned, is conclusive and binding upon the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal dealing with a claim petition under Section 110-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, and if not, for what purposes and to what extent can such a judgment be availed of by the parties concerned.

Ratio Decidendi: The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is a Court as defined in Section 3 of the Evidence Act and, therefore, the judgment of the Criminal Court is not relevant and the findings contained in the said judgment cannot be looked at or considered while deciding the claim preferred under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Final Decision: The judgment of the Criminal Court is neither conclusive nor binding on the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and its findings as to the guilt or otherwise of the driver are wholly irrelevant for the purpose of the trial on merits of the claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. Such judgment can however, be relevant only for the purpose and to the extent specified in Section 43 of the Evidence Act.

Judgment

Narula, J.

1. In this appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act (4 of 1939), as subsequently amended by Act 100 of 1956, against an award, dated March 19, 1963, for Rs. 6,750.46 P. and costs, it was argued on behalf of the judgment-debtor appellant before Gurdev Singh, J., that the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hold that Raghbir Singh, the driver of the alleged offending vehicle was guilty of any rash or negligent act as Raghbir Singh had already been acquitted by this Court on August 14, 1961 (in Criminal Revision No. 312 of 1961) of the charge of rashness or negligence in respect of the same accident which gave rise to the claim under Section 110-A of the Act. In view of the conflict of authority on the abovesaid point, and the prima facie inclination of the learned Judge not to agree with the law laid down by Mahajan, J. in Sadhu Singh v. Punjab Roadways, Ambala City, 1968-70 Pun. L. R. 39 = (AIR 1968 Punj. 466), and in view of the further fact that this question is likely to arise in a large number of cases, the learned Single Judge has referred the following question for decision by a Division Bench:-

-

"Whether the judgment of a criminal Court in a prosecution arising out of a motor accident, determining the guilt or innocence of the driver of the motor vehicle concerned, is conclusive and binding upon the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal dealing with a claim petition under Section 110-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, and if not, for what purposes and to what extent can such a judgment be availed of by the parties concerned."

2. Sections 110 to 110-F and Section 111-A were added to the principal Act of 1939 by the various provisions contained in the amending Act 100 of 1956. Section 110 authorises the State Government to constitute one or more Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals for the purpose of adjudicating upon claims for compensation in respect of accidents involving the death of or bodily injury to, persons arising out of the use of motor vehicles. Section 110-A states that an application for compensation arising out of an accident of the nature specified above may be made by the person who has sustained the injury or by the legal representatives of the deceased where death has resulted from the accident. Section 110-B provides that the Claims Tribunal shall, after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard, hold an inquiry into the claim and may make an award determining the amount of compensation which appears to it to be just. Section 110-C then provides:-

-

"(1) In holding any inquiry under Section 110-B, the Claims Tribunal may, subject to any rules that may be made in this behalf, follow such summary procedure as it thinks fit. (2) The Claims Tribunal shall have all the powers of a Civil Court for the purpose of taking evidence on oath and of enforcing the attendance of witnesses and of compelling the discovery and production of documents and material objects and for such other purposes as may be prescribed; and the Claims Tribunal shall be deemed to be a Civil Court for all the purposes of Section 195 and Chapter XXXV of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.

(3) Subject to any rules that may be made in this behalf, the Claims Tribunal may, for the purpose of adjudicating upon any claim for compensation, choose one or more persons possessing special knowledge of any matter relevant to the inquiry to assist it in holding the inquiry."

Section 110-D gives a statutory right of appeal to a person aggrieved by an award of a Claims Tribunal. Such an appeal lies in cases where the amount in dispute in appeal is not less than Rs. 2,000/-, and is preferable to the High Court. Section 110-E relates to recovery of money from insurers and Section 110-F bars the jurisdiction of Civil Courts to entertain any question relating to any claim for compensation which may be adjudicated upon by the Claims Tribunal, and also bars the issue of an injunction in respect of any action taken or

































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top