IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SURINDER GUPTA, J.
SBS Financers Bathinda - Appellant
Versus
Narinder Jeet Kaur and others - Respondents
FAO No. 2216 of 2010 (O&M) And FAO No. 3174 of 2011 (O&M)
Decided on : 08.02.2016
Liability - Motor Vehicle Accident - Motor Vehicles Act, Section 2(30), 146 - The court discussed the liability of the financer in a motor vehicle accident case and referred to the definition of 'owner' under Section 2(30) of the Motor Vehicles Act. The court also cited the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. vs. Kumari Reshma, 2015 (3) SCC 679 to establish the principle that the person in possession of the vehicle under the hypothecation agreement is considered the owner. The court held that the liability to pay compensation lies with the owner and driver of the offending vehicle and not the finance company.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a motor vehicle accident resulting in the death of a young woman. The claimants sought compensation for the death of their daughter, and the financer of the offending vehicle challenged the award related to fixing his liability. The claimants also sought enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the liability to pay compensation lies with the owner and driver of the offending vehicle and not the finance company. The court also enhanced the compensation awarded to the claimants from Rs. 2,06,100 to Rs. 8,05,400, holding the respondents jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of compensation.
Issues: The issues included the liability of the financer in a motor vehicle accident case, the assessment of compensation, and the application of the multiplier for calculating the amount of dependency.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the definition of 'owner' under Section 2(30) of the Motor Vehicles Act and the principle established in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. vs. Kumari Reshma, 2015 (3) SCC 679 to determine the liability of the financer. The court also applied the multiplier of 18 and considered future prospects and personal expenses of the deceased in calculating the enhanced compensation.
Final Decision: The court set aside the award holding the financer liable and enhanced the compensation awarded to the claimants. The respondents were held jointly and severally liable to pay the enhanced amount of compensation.
Surinder Gupta, J.
Both the appeals mentioned in head note above arise from the award dated 27.02.2010 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bathinda (later referred to as 'the Tribunal') whereby claim petition filed by Narinder Jeet Kaur and Surinder Pal Singh for the death of their daughter Preet Kamal in accident with truck No. RJ-13-1G-0464 (later referred to as 'the offending vehicle') was allowed. As the truck was not insured, driver, owner as well as financer of the truck were held jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of compensation.
2. In FAO No. 2216 of 2010, financer of the offending vehicle has challenged the award so far as it relates to fixing his liability jointly and severally with owner and driver of the offending vehicle. In FAO No. 3174 of 2011, claimants have sought enhancement of compensation as awarded by the Tribunal.
3. Both the appeals have been taken up together for decision by this common judgment as these arise from the same award passed by the Tribunal.
Brief Facts:
4. Case of claimants, in brief, is that on 06.10.2006, their daughter Preet Kamal aged 21 years was going for her studies on her bike bearing registration No. PB-3-G-6823 on Bhatti road Bathinda, when the offending vehicle came from behind and tried to overtake the bike from wrong side and in the process struck against the bike as a result of which Preet Kamal was crushed under the wheels of truck and died at the spot. The offending vehicle was being driven by respondent no.1 Harvinder Singh (respondent no. 3 in FAO No. 2216 of 2010) at the time of accident in a rash and negligent manner. The deceased was studying in B.Sc. final in Government Rajindra College, Bathinda. She used to help in domestic work and was contributing Rs. 3000/- per month to her family.
5. In reply, respondent no. 2 Kulwant Singh (respondent no. 4 in FAO No. 2216 of 2010) owner of the offending vehicle denied that any accident had occurred out of the use of offending vehicle. The deceased had died due to her own negligence/rashness and negligent driving of her bike. He also took a plea that truck in question was hypothecated with SBS Financers and liability to pay the amount of compensation is of financer as they have been charging insurance premium from him.
6. In separate reply filed by SBS Financers, it was pleaded that finance company was neither owner nor in possession of the offending vehicle. A small loan of Rs. 19,000/- was advanced to respondent no. 2 i.e. owner of the offending vehicle against security of truck and the loan was repaid within one year i.e. in June, 2005 and the documents were returned to respondent no. 2, as such, no liability of respondent no. 3-SBS Financers (appellant in FAO No. 2216 of 2010) to pay any compensation is attracted.
7. The offending vehicle was admittedly not insured, as such, insurance company impleaded as respondent no. 3 (to be disclosed by owner and driver of the offending vehicle before the Tribunal) was ordered to be deleted.
8. Respondent no. 1driver of the offending vehicle appeared through counsel but did not file any written reply.
9. On appraisal of evidence, the Tribunal recorded the finding that accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by respondent no. 1. Monthly income of the deceased was assessed as Rs. 4200/- and after making deduction of 1/3rd towards her personal expenses, annual dependency of claimants was assessed as Rs. 33,600/. The Tribunal applied multiplier of 6 while calculating the amount of dependency to which Rs. 2000/- was added towards funeral expenses and Rs. 2500/- towards loss of estate and total compensation of Rs. 2,06,100/- was allowed.
FAO No. 2216 OF 2010 (LIABILITY OF FINANCER)
10. The Tribunal made the financer liable on the grounds that registration certificate of the offending vehicle was returned to owner in the ye
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.