Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Section 166

Accidental claim - Appellant, a 50 year old, cart puller earning Rs.3300 p.m. met with an accident with a tanker, which was driven rashly and negligently - Multiple fracture in leg - Left leg amputated from knee - Appellant's disabled person's card showing his disability at 60% Tribunal, on referring to Schedule 1 of the 1923 Act, held disability at 50% - Taking his age to be 55 years and monthly income as Rs. 2400 p.m., Tribunal awarded Rs. 1,58,400/- for loss of future earning, Rs.30,000/- for mental and physical agony and Rs.15,000/- for medical expenses - High Court enhancing the compensation from Rs.2,03,400/- to Rs. 2,58,000 maintaining the disability at 50% - Justification. Held, both the courts below erred in pegging down the disability of the appellant to 50% with reference to Schedule 1 of 1923 Act. Extent of physical disability has to be judged from the nature of work - For a cart puller, losing his leg means end of his livelihood and disability is 100%. At the age of 55, finding an alternative job is not possible - Further, doing an alternative work is not a factor to scale down compensation - Compensation enhanced to Rs. 4,01,400/-. Additional compensation amount to carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. K. Janardhan's & Raj Kumar's cases referred and followed.

Found In:  Topic Index

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Section 173 , Section 166

Deceased died in an accident - Tribunal held - Accident due to rash and negligent driving of truck - Tribunal considered - Quantum of compensation - Assessed income at Rs.50,000/- per annum - Deduction of Rs.1,500/- - Concluded dependency of - Claimants - Rs.2,600/- per month - Tribunal applied multiplier of 8 - Held - Claimants entitled compensation of Rs.2,59,000/- with interest 12% per annum - If not paid within two months - Interest 18% per annum - Appeal - Challenged award - Pleaded - Tribunal committed error - Applying multiplier of 8 - Multiplier of 17 have been applied - High Court - Not accept plea - Applied multiplier of 13 - Held - Appellants entitled compensation of Rs.4,20,600/- - Dissatisfied - Appeal Supreme Court - Deceased of 28 years - In terms of ratio in Sarla Verma's case - Amount of compensation - Applying multiplier 17 - Appellants entitle compensation Rs.5,30,400/- - Rs.15,000/- added under other permissible heads - As done by High Court - Total amount payable be Rs.5,45,400/- - Impugned judgment modified - Appellants entitled compensation of Rs.5,45,400/- after deducting - Amount already paid - Also pay interest 6% per annum - On enhanced amount Rs.1,24,800/- - Date of filing claim petition - Balance within a period of three months - Appeal allowed.

Found In:  Topic Index

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Section 166

Appellant a Coolie - Earning 4500/- per month - Riding as pillion on motorcycle - Met with an accident - Sustained grievous injuries - Right hand completely disabled - Tribunal awarded Rs. 1,13,900/- with interest at 6% per annum - Appeal - High Court - Enhanced compensation 1,33,990 from 133900 - Appeal - Doctor evidence cannot do work as a coolie - Loss of earnings or earning capacity - Disability - Caused due to accident - Sustained severe bodily injuries - Resulted in permanent partial disability - Would affect - Future earning capacity - Doctor as claimant's witness - Because of injury sustained - Claimant cannot work as a Coolie - Cannot do any other manual work - Amount awarded by Tribunal too less - Taking into consideration - Future economic loss - Interest of justice - Additional amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs) - Granted to appellant enhanced compensation - Appeals Allowed.

Found In:  Topic Index

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Motor Accident Claim

Contributory negligence - Liability towards of the petitioner - In question - A motorcycle, being driven in a very rash and negligent manner struck against the scooter of the deceased as a result whereof the deceased and his son were thrown on to the road and the deceased succumbed to the fatal injuries sustained by him - Claim lodged - MACT awarded a sum of 8,35,067/- in favour of the claimants together with interest @7%. - High Court upheld the order of the Tribunal - hence, the petitions - Fact not disputed - Petitioner to ensure that his motorcycle was not misused and that too by a minor who had no licence to drive the same, the MACT rightly saddled the liability for payment of compensation on the Petitioner - Petitions dismissed - No costs.

Found In:  Topic Index, Subject Index

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Motor Accident Claim

Quantum of compensation - In question - Appellant-claimant sustained grievous injuries in a motor vehicle accident - Claim lodged - Tribunal found that the accident was caused due to the negligence of the driver of the Tamil Nadu Corporation, thus, quantified the compensation to Rs.5,05,053.45/- - The High Court modified the award of the Tribunal to Rs.4,05,053.45/- as compensation payable to the appellant-claimant - Appeals - Whether the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards "permanent disability" in addition to the amount awarded under the head "loss of earning capacity" - Held yes - Disability Certificates, issued by the two doctors, show that the appellant had disability to the extent of 90% - Partial loss in the eye sight, loss of middle finger of the right hand not only affects the claimant's earning capacity but also affects normal avocation and day-to-day work - Tribunal was fully justified in granting a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- towards permanent disability - Impugned order of the High Court set aside and of the Tribunal restored - Appeals allowed.

Found In:  Topic Index, Subject Index

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Motor Accident Claim

Deceased died on the spot - MACT applied the Multiplier of 9, and awarded a total compensation of Rs. 1,72,000/- along with 6 % interest per annum to the claimants - High Court - Enhanced the amount of compensation from Rs. 1,72,000/- to Rs. 3,39,000/- by applying multiplier of 18 instead of 9 - Appeal - In case where an unmarried young man dies, the average age of the parents will be taken for determining the multiplier and not the age of the deceased - Award passed by the Tribunal restored - Appeal allowed - No costs.

Found In:  Topic Index, Subject Index, Judgement

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Section 166

Tribunal concluded - Appellant/Injured consumed alcohol - Not mean - Driver of vehicle not need to drive the vehicle cautiously - Rash and negligent driving - Sustained injuries - Tribunal awarded Rs.40,000/- with interest @ 8% p.a. - High Court enhanced to Rs.1,48,200/- with interest @ 6% p.a. - Appeal for enhancement - Doctor assessed - Whole body disability 29% - Nature of disability - Cannot work as a coolie or do any other manual work - Judgment of High Court modified - Awarding Rs.3,00,000/- with interest of 6% p.a. on enhanced sum - Appeal allowed - No costs.

Found In:  Topic Index

The Consumer Protection Act,1986  - Vehicle Insurance

Vehicle insurance - Repudiation of claim - Insured bus met with an accident - Suffered extensive damage - Claim lodged - Not settled - Complaint filed - Lower forum allowed claim - National Commission - Set aside and quashed - Orders passed by District Forum and State Commission - Concluded - Driver at relevant point of time - Not holding valid driving licence - Appeal - Copy of Duplicate Licence issued by Licensing Authority, Murshidabad in the name of driver of bus - Issued only after "verification from original" - Eeven if original application not available but since duplicate licence was issued by - Same licensing Authority, Murshidabad - Cannot be challenged that original licence was fake, forged, manufactured or engineered document - At relevant point of time driver was holding a valid driving licence to drive the bus - Impugned order - National Commission set aside - Directed to pay Rs. 2,72,517/- with interest at rate of 9% per annum - Appeal allowed.

Found In:  Topic Index

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Section 166

Motor accident claim - Victim hit by a vehicle from behind - Driven rashly and negligently - Victim succumbed to injuries - Tribunal found involvement of offending vehicle - Not proved - Hence no compensation - High Court - Affirmed finding of Tribunal - Appeal - Evidence on record - Clearly proved number of vehicle name of owner - Not mentioned in FIR - When a person seeing his brother being knocked down by a speeding vehicle - Suffering in pain - Need of immediate medical attention - First attempt will be to take his brother to a hospital or to a doctor - Impugned judgments of Tribunal and High Court set aside - Insurance Co. directed to pay Rs.6 lacs as compensation to claimants with interest @ 7% p.a. - Appeal allowed.

Found In:  Topic Index

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Motor Accident Claim

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) concluded - Accident occurred due to negligence of lorry driver - Result - Appellant sustained injuries - Loss of future earning capacity 100%- Directed owner and insurance company - Jointly and severally pay Rs.5,77,800/- as compensation with interest @ 8% - High Court reduced to Rs.3,20,000/- - Without giving any reasons - Appeal - Reduction in compensation by High Court without justification - Arbitrary - Set aside - Appeal allowed - No costs.

Found In:  Topic Index, Subject Index

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Motor Accident Claim

Insurance Company liable - Compensation to passengers - Travelling in a public transport - Breach of conditions of permit - Insurance policy sitting capacity six persons including driver - Vehicle carrying fifteen passengers - Fell into a ditch - Death majority of passengers - Causing serious injuries - Remaining passengers claim lodged - Tribunal directed - Insurance Co pay compensation to claimants - High court confirmed - Appeal - Liability of the insurer - Confined to number of persons covered by insurance policy - Not beyond the same persons travelling in excess - Entitled compensated by owner - Entitled compensation from insurer recover from owner -Insurance Co deposit total amount awarded - Entitled to recover excess of its liability from owner by execution - Appeals disposed.

Found In:  Topic Index, Subject Index, Judgement

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Motor Accident Claim

Motor Accident claim - Appellant/claimant going on motorcycle - Seating on pillion seat - Another scooter from wrong side hit the right leg of the appellant - Result she fell down - Right leg fractured received multiple injuries - Claim - Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.1,36,547/- with 9% interest - High Court set aside - Appeal - Appellant have 32% permanent disability - Leg was shortened by two inch - Disability certificate was proved - Supreme Court - Complaint is not disputed - Decision of Tribunal cannot be reversed on ground - Nobody came from office of SSP to prove complaint - In a road accident claim - Strict principles of proof in a criminal case are not attracted - Impugned judgment of High Court quashed - Tribunal awarded restored - Appeal allowed.

Found In:  Topic Index, Subject Index, Judgement

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Motor Accident Claim

Motor Accident Claim - Compensation - Determination of amount - High Court - Partly allowed the appeal filed by the Insurance Company and reduced the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head "loss of earnings" from Rs.5,00,000/- to Rs.2,60,000/- - Evidence on record showed that apart from the monthly salary of Rs.2500/- - Deceased was getting Rs.50/- as daily allowance - Appeal - Tribunal was right in assessing the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.4,000/- - On applying the multiplier of 15 - Court fixed the amount of compensation receivable by the appellants under the head "loss of earnings" at Rs.4,50,000/- - Appeal allowed - No cost.

Found In:  Topic Index, Subject Index, Judgement

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Motor Accident Claim

Motor Accident Claim - Extent of disability - Injured in a motor accident - Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.94,700/-, with interest at 9% per annum - Appeal -Increase in compensation - High Court - Rejected - Appeal - Tribunal proceeded on basis permanent disability 45% - Loss of his future earning capacity also 45% - Tribunal overlooked the fact - Disability certificate referred to 45% disability to left lower limb - Not in regard to the entire body - Permanent disability of the limb could not considered to functional disability of the body nor could be assumed - Result in a corresponding extent of loss of earning capacity - As the disability would not have prevented from carrying on his avocation as a cheese vendor- It might impede in his smooth functioning - While assessing - Permanent functional disability of body as 25%-loss of future earning capacity as 20% -Court increased the compensation by Rs.20,000/- with interest rate awarded by the Tribunal - Appeal partly allowed.

Found In:  Topic Index, Subject Index, Judgement

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Section 166

Motor Accident Claim - For sustaining permanent disability - Enhancement of compensation under the head loss of amenities and enjoyment of life and loss of earnings during the laid up period - Held, High Court failed to give sufficient reasons for taking said view - High Court was acting as a Court of first appeal - And was expected to properly analyses the evidence on record before coming to a finding - Leading cases referred - Impugned judgment of the High Court set aside - Matter remanded back to the High Court for decision afresh in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in its various cases - High Court directed to decide the appeal expeditiously - Appeal allowed

Found In:  Topic Index, Judgement

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Motor Accident Claim

Motor Accident Claim - Petition filed for - The Tribunal awarded a lump sum amount of Rs.50,000/- to the claimant with simple interest @ 12% p.a. High Court increased the disability compensation from Rs. 50,000/- to Rs.1,10,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. on the additional amount - Appeal - Enhancement of compensation - The Supreme Court directed the respondents to pay an additional sum of Rs. 1,10,000/- to the appellants to adequately and properly compensate them under the heads (i) `expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing food and miscellaneous expenditure' and (ii) `future medical expenses' with simple interest @ 7% p.a. on the additional amount - Appeal allowed.

Found In:  Subject Index

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Motor Accident Claim

Claimant a pillion rider of a motor cycle met with an accident due to oil spill on the road - Claimant and driver sustained injuries - Both treated in hospital - Vehicle was insured - Tribunal quantified compensation payable by the Insurance Company at a sum of '3,50,000/- - Aggrieved claimant preferred appeal before High Court enhanced compensation to '4,90,000/- from '3,50,000/- - This judgment and order called in question in appeal - Supreme Court - Held -We do not intend to disturb judgment and order passed by High Court except to a limited extent - It is no doubt true that while making assessment - There is an element of guess work - The Court has the discretion to accept either totally or partially or reject Certificate so produced and marked in trial - Appeal partly allowed.

Found In:  Subject Index

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Motor Accident Claim

Motor Accident Claim - Compensation - Tribunal found the claimant's son died in accident - Caused by the bus and the truck - Negligent driving by the drivers of the vehicles - Computed compensation to Rs. 60,000/- - After adjusting Rs. 25,000/- which was paid to claimant towards no fault liability - Held - Claimant was entitled to further sum of Rs. 35,000/- and-simple interest @ 10% p.a - High Court - Confirmed - Appeal for enhancement - Deceased was 22 year old and not married - Evidence showed deceased was in forest department -Court enhanced compensation to Rs. 1,32,000/- paid by insurance companies with the simple interest of 10% per annum - Appeal allowed.

Found In:  Subject Index, Judgement

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Section 140 , Section 166

Victim met with motor accident- Rash and negligent reversing of the truck driver - Tribunal and High Court rejected the claim - Ground - FIR of the incident lodged belatedly -Appellant failed to establish -Fateful day said truck was involved in motor road accident- Causing injuries to him - Appeal - Whether delay in lodging the FIR of accident- Could prove fatal - Result into dismissal of Claim Petition - Accident on 7.10.2023 - FIR lodged by Appellant's father on 26.1.2024 - Appellant's father gave exact and vivid description of accident -Injuries sustained by his son - Even the owner of the vehicle- Admitted -His vehicle met with an accident on 7.10.2023 - He was intimated on phone very same day- Amply proved - Truck was involved in road accident - Delay in lodging FIR satisfactory explained - Certificate by Medical Board - Clearly established -Permanent disability to the extent of 50% - After several surgeries - Not able to control his urination - Respondents are directed - Jointly & severally - Rs.2.5 lac compensation with interest @ 6% p.a. to appellant - Claim petition allowed.

Found In:  Judgement

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Section 166

Claim petition - Deceased walking along - Side of National Highway - Lorry driven rashly suddenly hit him - Died on the spot - Tribunal view of the rash and negligent driving - Awarded a compensation of Rs.1,71,600/- with interest @ 12% p.a. cost of Rs.1,500/- to claimants - High Court - Reduced compensation to Rs.85,000/- interest @ 12% p.a. - Appeal - Supreme Court - High Court should have proceeded to compute the compensation on the age of the deceased - Order of High Court set aside - Tribunal restored - Appeal allowed - No costs.

Found In:  Judgement

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Section 110 (1) , Section 92

Claim petition - Compensation - Accident arising out of the use of the petrol tanker - Fire and explosion of the tanker - Time gap of about 4 hours between the tanker meeting with the road accident and the fire and explosion of the tanker - Tribunal dismissing petitions filed under section 92A rejecting no fault compensation - Tribunal finding that the fire and the explosion could not be said to be accident arising out of the use of the petrol tanker as there was absolutely no connection between the road accident and the fire accident which took place about 4 hours later - Decision of High Court in case of Shivaji Dayanu Patil on the issue that the death of the victim caused by the fire and explosion of the petrol tanker is a result of an accident arising out of the use of the motor vehicle namely the petrol tanker- High Court reversing the order passed by the Claims Tribunal holding that Decision in case of Shivaji Dayanu Patil is conclusive and binding - Not open to the Claims Tribunal to take a contrary view - Appeal against - Decision rendered in Shivaji Dayanu Patil completely binding on the Claims Tribunal and it is not open to the Claims Tribunal to come to any finding inconsistent with the aforesaid decision of this Court - No merit in appeal - Appeal dismissed.

Found In:  Judgement

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Section 168 , Section 173

Quantum - Fatal - Determination of just compensation - Deceased aged 39 years, officiating Executive Engineer - Claimants Wife and 3 children - Gross salary of deceased on date of accident was Rs. 2,680/- p.m. - Tribunal assessed contribution to family as Rs. 2,260/- p.m., applied multiplier of 18, assessed pecuniary damages at Rs. 4,75,000/-, deducted 1/3rd against lump sum payment and awarded Rs. 2,76,800/- On appeal High Court held claimants entitled to Rs. 4,70,000/- Whether High Court was in error in reducing by 1/3rd the compensation assessed after ascertainment of multiplicand capitalized with multiplier of 16 ? - Held - (Yes) - Deceased at the time of accident had stable job and had fair chance of regular promotion to post of Executive Engineer and Superintending Engineer in due course of service - He had about 18 years of service - Having regard to prospects of advancement and future career, High Court assumed income of deceased at Rs. 5,400/- p.m., deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses, assessed family contribution as Rs. 3,600/-p.m. - High Court took into consideration guidelines laid down in Susamma Thomas case which warrants no interference - However multiplier of 16 is on higher side it should be 14 - Claimants entitled to Rs. 6,04,800/- High Court clearly by 1/3rd the compensation assessed after ascertainment of multiplicand- Compensation awarded by High Court enhanced from Rs. 4,70,000/- to Rs. 6,04,800/- with interest at 9% p.a. - Principles discussed base on case laws.

Found In:  Judgement

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Section 140 , Section 166

No-fault liability - Compensation -True nature and character - Death of motorcyclist - Compensation under no-fault liability paid by insurer - No lapse on part of truck driver found - Accident caused due to careless and negligent driving of deceased himself - Direction issued for refund of compensation paid underno-fault -Tribunal completely failed to realize true nature character of compensation in terms of section 140 - Such compensation is made regardless of any wrongful act, neglect or default of person in respect of whose death claim made -Tribunal was patently in error in directing refund of amount - High Court also failed in missing out this grave mistake in judgment - Impugned order of Tribunal directing refund set aside.

Found In:  Judgement