PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Vinod K.Sharma, J.
Sudhir Kumar
Versus
Omwati
First Appeal Order No. 2539 of 2008,
Decided On : JANUARY 6, 2010
Motor Vehicles Act - Compensation - Sec. 163-A, Sec. 166
Fact of the Case:
The appellant filed an appeal against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, seeking compensation for the death of Rakesh Kumar in a motor vehicle accident. The appellant contested the liability fixed on the insurance company and the delay in filing the appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The court upheld the tribunal's decision, ruling that the liability to pay compensation rested with the appellant as the owner of the motor vehicle, as per Sec. 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. The appeal was also dismissed as time-barred.
Issues: Liability for compensation, Delay in filing the appeal
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that as per Sec. 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, the liability to pay compensation for the accident rested with the owner of the motor vehicle. The court also found the appeal to be time-barred due to the delay in filing.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed on merit and as time-barred.
VINOD K.SHARMA, J.
1. The appellant-owner of the motor cycle No. HR-12f-1504 has filed this appeal against the award passed by the learned Motor Accident claims Tribunal, Rohtak allowing the claim petition filed under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 .
2. The claimant-respondent sought compensation for death of rakesh Kumar, on the pleadings that on 5.7.2004 the appellant along with rakesh Kumar was travelling on motor cycle No. HR-12f-1504 to Bharat colony, Rohtak. The motor cycle was being driven by deceased Rakesh kumar. When the motor cycle reached near the red light of Shiela Bye-pass the motor cycle slipped, and resultantly Rakesh Kumar and the appellant fell on the ground. Rakesh Kumar died due to the injuries suffered in the accident.
3. In spite of service the appellant did not appear to contest the claim petition. The award was passed by the learned Tribunal against the insurance Company. However, keeping in view the fact that no licence of rakesh Kumar was produced on record, the Insurance Company was given liberty to recover the amount from the owner i. e. the appellant.
4. The appellant has challenged the impugned award, by placing on record, the Driving licence of Rakesh Kumar showing that late Rakesh kumar had driving licence. The learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, therefore, was not justified in permitting the insurance company to recover the amount from the appellant, though the liability fixed was joint and several.
5. The appeal is contested by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.3-Insurance Company on the plea that, as per the admitted fact, no liability could be fixed on the Insurance Company for the accident. Admittedly the motor cycle was handed over to the deceased by the appellant, who was owner of the motor cycle and he was a pillion rider with him. Therefore late Shri Rakesh Kumar was to be treated as owner for all intents and purposes.
6. In support of this contention the learned counsel for the respondent placed reliance on the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Ningamma and another Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. 2009 ACJ 2020, wherein the Honble Supreme Court has answered the following question:-
"Whether the legal representatives of a person, who was driving a motor vehicle, after borrowing it from the real owner meets with an accident without involving any other vehicle, would be entitled to compensation under section 163-A of MVA or under any other provision (s) of law and also whether the insurer who issued the insurance policy would be bound to indemnify the deceased or his legal representative? The question raised has been answered as under :-
Before dwelling further, it would be useful to discuss the relevant paras of section 163-A and 166 of the MVA applicable in the present case.
"163-A. Special provisions as to payment of compensation on structured formula basis.-- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force or instrument having the force of law, the owner of the motor vehicle of the authorised insurer shall be liable to pay in the case of death or permanent disablement due to accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, compensation, as indicated in the Second Schedule, to the legal heirs or the victim, as the case may be.
X X X X X X X X X
(2) In any claim for compensation under sub-section (1), the claimant shall not be required to plead or establish that the death or permanent disablement in respect of which the claim has been made was due to any wrongful act or neglect or default of the owner of the vehicle or vehicles concerned or of any other person.
(3) The Central government may, keeping in view the cost of living by notification in the official Gazette, from time to time amend the Second Schedule."
166. Application for compensation- (1) An application for compensation arising out of an accident of the nature specified in sub-section (1) of section 165
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.