Bombay High Court Allows Conversion of Claim Petition from Section 166 to Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act in Fatal Accident Case. Claimants entitled to compensation under no-fault liability despite deceased's own negligence.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 5
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal arises from a judgment of the Claims Tribunal, Mumbai, dismissing M.A.C.P No.645 of 2006 filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The claimants, mother and siblings of deceased Mohd. Iftikhar Kamal Ahmed Khan, sought compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- for his death in a motor vehicular accident on 27/09/2005. The deceased was riding a motorcycle (No.MH-03-AC-2119) and allegedly lost control, dashing against a road divider, resulting in his death and that of the pillion rider. The claimants alleged the deceased was 21 years old, self-employed, earning Rs.5,000/- per month. The owner of the motorcycle stated he had sold the vehicle to the deceased on 12/09/2005. The insurance company denied liability, contending the accident was due to the deceased's own rash and negligent driving, and that he was not a third party under Section 147, and the policy did not cover the driver's risk. The Tribunal found the deceased solely negligent and dismissed the petition under Section 166 as not maintainable. In appeal under Section 173, the claimants' counsel conceded that the petition under Section 166 was not maintainable but argued for conversion to a petition under Section 163-A, relying on New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Ashabai Kalyan Kothi and Ors. and United India Insurance Company Limited vs. Sunil Kumar and Anr. The court held that conversion is permissible as Section 163-A provides for no-fault liability, and the claimants are entitled to compensation under the structured formula. The court set aside the Tribunal's order and directed the insurance company to pay compensation as per the Second Schedule, with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the petition.

Headnote

A) Motor Vehicles Act - Conversion of Petition - Section 166 to Section 163-A - Maintainability - Claim petition under Section 166 was dismissed as deceased was negligent rider - Held that petition can be converted to one under Section 163-A as no-fault liability does not require proof of negligence - Claimants entitled to compensation under structured formula (Paras 7-10).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which is not maintainable due to the deceased's own negligence, can be converted into a petition under Section 163-A of the Act.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 17/03/2016 is set aside. The claim petition is converted into one under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The insurance company is directed to pay compensation as per the structured formula under the Second Schedule, with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the petition till realization. The amount be deposited within eight weeks.

Law Points

  • Conversion of claim petition under Section 166 to Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act
  • 1988 is permissible
  • Maintainability of claim under Section 163-A does not require proof of negligence
  • Liability of insurer under Section 163-A is no-fault liability
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (BOM) (06) 65

First Appeal No.191 of 2017

2022-06-28

Smt. Anuja Prabhudessai, J.

Mr. Amol Gatne and Ms Swati Mehta for the Appellants, Mr. Rajesh Kanojia with Ms Nitika Singh and Riddhi Chavan i/b. M/s. Res Juris for Respondent No.2

Mrs. Safiakhatoon Kamal Ahmed Khan and Ors.

Farooq Merchant and Anr.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against dismissal of claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for compensation in a fatal motor accident.

Remedy Sought

Claimants sought conversion of petition under Section 166 to Section 163-A and award of compensation.

Filing Reason

The deceased died in a motor accident due to his own negligence; the claim under Section 166 was dismissed as not maintainable.

Previous Decisions

The Claims Tribunal dismissed M.A.C.P No.645 of 2006 on 17/03/2016 holding that the petition under Section 166 was not maintainable as the deceased was negligent.

Issues

Whether a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which is not maintainable due to the deceased's own negligence, can be converted into a petition under Section 163-A of the Act.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants' counsel conceded that the petition under Section 166 was not maintainable but argued for conversion to Section 163-A, relying on New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Ashabai Kalyan Kothi and Ors. and United India Insurance Company Limited vs. Sunil Kumar and Anr. Respondent No.2-Insurance Company opposed conversion, but the court found no merit in opposition.

Ratio Decidendi

A claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which is not maintainable due to the deceased's own negligence, can be converted into a petition under Section 163-A as the latter provides for no-fault liability and does not require proof of negligence. The claimants are entitled to compensation under the structured formula.

Judgment Excerpts

By this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the Appellants have challenged the judgment dated 17/03/2016 passed by the Claims Tribunal, Mumbai dismissing M.A.C.P. No.645 of 2006, filed under Section 166 of the M.V. Act. Mr. Amol Gatne, learned counsel for the Appellant-Claimants concedes that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V. Act was not maintainable. He however, submits that it is permissible to convert the petition under Section 166 to petition under Section 163-A of the M.V. Act. In the instant case, the deceased was the rider of the motor cycle. The claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V. Act was not maintainable. However, the petition could be converted into one under Section 163-A of the M.V. Act.

Procedural History

The claimants filed M.A.C.P No.645 of 2006 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Claims Tribunal, Mumbai. The Tribunal dismissed the petition on 17/03/2016. The claimants appealed under Section 173 of the Act to the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, which allowed the appeal on 28/06/2022.

Acts & Sections

  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: Section 166, Section 163-A, Section 173, Section 147
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Review Petitions in Urban Land Ceiling Case — No Error Apparent on Record. Review petitioner failed to demonstrate any error apparent on the face of the record in the order dated 17/06/2016 passed in WP Nos.54609-5...
Related Judgement
High Court Karnataka High Court Dismisses Writ Appeals Against Single Judge Order in Wakf Property Dispute — Maintainability of Writ Petition Under Article 226 Against Wakf Board Upheld. The court held that the Wakf Board is a statutory body amenable to writ ...