The court established the ability to convert claims from Section 163-A to Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, allowing for cases based on negligence to receive thorough examination and compensation.

JUDGMENT :

Sudeepti Sharma, J.

The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 24.10.2005 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) whereby the claimants-appellants have been granted compensation to the tune of Rs.4,17,500/- alongwith interest @7.5% per annum, for the enhancement of the awarded amount.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 03.07.2002 the claimants – Master Lucky, Prabha Devi, Prem Kishore and Sanjay Dubey were travelling in Maruti Van bearing registration No. CH-01-J-1101 being driven by respondent No.1 Happy. They were going towards Ambala Cantt. When the aforesaid maruti van crossed the chowk of Hallo Majra it tried to over-take a truck going ahead of it. Due to high speed of the van respondent No.1 could not control the same. As a result thereof, the van dashed into the truck from its back side. In this accident, the claimants - Lucky, Prabha Devi and Prem Kishore sustained multiple injuries on their persons whereas Sanjay Dubey (since deceased) sustained fatal injuries.

3. Upon notice, respondent No.1 remained ex-parte. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 appeared and denied the factum of claim.

4. From the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues:-

1. Whether death of deceased Sanjay Dubey had occurred and claimants Lucky, Prabha Devi and Prem Kishore had sustained multiple injuries on their persons to a road side accident which had occurred on 03.07.2002 on account of use of maruti van No.CH-01-J-1101 by respondent No.1? OPP

2. Whether the claimant Lucky is entitled to be compensated for the injuries sustained by him in the above accident? If so to what extent and by whom? OPP

3. Whether the claimant Prabha Devi is entitled to be compensated for the injuries sustained by her in the above accident? If so to what effects and by whom? OPP

4. Whether the claimant Prem Kishore is entitled to be compensated for the injuries sustained by him in the above accident? If so to what extent and by whom? OPP

5. Whether the claimants Mamta etc., are entitled to be compensated for the death of Sanjay Dubey having occurred in the above accident? If so to what extent and by whom? OPP

6. Whether respondent No.1 was not holding a valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident? If so, its effect? OPR-3

7. Relief.

5. After considering the evidence, the appellants/claimants were held entitled to receive the total compensation of Rs.4,17,500/- along with interest @7.5% per annum. The present appeal is filed by the appellants under Section 163-A of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988 (prior to 2019 Amendment w.e.f 01.04.2022), for enhancement of the awarded amount of compensation.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE COUNSELS

6. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that though the claim petition was filed under Section 163-A of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988 (prior to 2019 Amendment w.e.f 01.04.2022) for enhancement, she prays that the present appeal be treated under Section 166 of the Act. She has relied upon a judgment of this Court in case of Smt. Babli Devi and Others Vs. Kuldeep Singh and Others [FAO-8201-2015, Decided on 28.05.2018].

7. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.3- Insurance Company submits that no formal application with respect to Section 166 of the Act was moved during the pendency of the claim petition, therefore, the claim petition cannot be converted to Section 166 of the Act.

8. I have heard the learned counsel