Case Note & Summary
The present appeal was filed by the appellants challenging the judgment and award passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur in Claim Petition No. 449/1995 dated 29th June 2007. By this judgment, compensation was directed to be paid by the appellants in favour of the claimants (respondent nos. 1 to 3). The claimants had filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, claiming compensation of Rs.11,27,000/- in respect of the death of one Kishor Damodhar Bingewar. The accident took place on 17/03/1995 at about 2.00 p.m. near village Gangalwadi on Barad – Kinni road. The appellants contended that the deceased was a pillion rider on a motorcycle bearing registration MH-34/C-1735 which was registered in the name of appellant no.1. Due to rash and negligent driving of appellant no.2, who was driving the vehicle, the vehicle skidded, causing grievous injuries to the deceased who died after shifting to the hospital. However, appellant no.2 contended that he was not riding the vehicle and was a pillion rider, and the deceased himself was riding the vehicle at the relevant time. The Insurance Company contended that the policy does not cover the risk of a pillion rider. The court examined the evidence and found that the deceased was the rider of the motorcycle, and no negligence was proved against the appellants. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal and set aside the award of the Tribunal.
Headnote
A) Motor Accident Claims - Negligence - Burden of Proof - Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The claimants alleged that the deceased was a pillion rider and the accident was caused by rash and negligent driving of appellant no.2. The appellants contended that the deceased was the rider himself. The court examined the evidence and found that the deceased was driving the motorcycle, and no negligence was proved against the appellants. Held that the appellants are not liable to pay compensation. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellants (owner and alleged driver) are liable to pay compensation for the death of the deceased when the deceased himself was riding the motorcycle and the accident occurred due to his own negligence?
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment and award passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur in Claim Petition No. 449/1995 dated 29th June 2007 is set aside. The appellants are not liable to pay any compensation.
Law Points
- Motor Accident Claims
- Negligence
- Burden of Proof
- Pillion Rider vs Rider
- Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act
- 1988
Case Details
2022 LawText (BOM) (07) 156
First Appeal No. 784 of 2007
Dhiraj s/o Mahaveersingh Chandel and Sharad s/o Dattatraya Yamawar
Smt. Usha W/o Kishor Bingewar, Abhinav S/o Kishor Bingewar (dead), Ku. Apurva D/o Kishor Bingewar, and National Insurance Company Limited
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Motor Accident Claim Appeal
Remedy Sought
Appellants sought to set aside the award of compensation passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.
Filing Reason
The appellants challenged the Tribunal's order directing them to pay compensation for the death of Kishor Damodhar Bingewar.
Previous Decisions
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur in Claim Petition No. 449/1995 dated 29th June 2007 awarded compensation against the appellants.
Issues
Whether the deceased was a pillion rider or the rider of the motorcycle?
Whether the appellants were negligent in causing the accident?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellants argued that the deceased himself was riding the motorcycle and the accident occurred due to his own negligence, not due to any fault of the appellants.
Claimants argued that the deceased was a pillion rider and the accident was caused by rash and negligent driving of appellant no.2.
Ratio Decidendi
The burden of proof lies on the claimants to establish negligence. In this case, the evidence showed that the deceased was the rider of the motorcycle, and no negligence was proved against the appellants. Therefore, the appellants cannot be held liable for compensation.
Judgment Excerpts
Present appeal is filed by the appellant challenging the judgment and award passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur in Claim Petition No. 449/1995 dated 29th June 2007.
It is contention of the appellant that the deceased was a pillion rider on a motor cycle... Due to rash and negligent driving of the appellant no.2, who was driving the vehicle, the vehicle skidded...
It is further contention of the appellant no.2 that he was not riding the vehicle and he was pillion rider and deceased himself was riding the vehicle at the relevant time.
Procedural History
The claimants filed Claim Petition No. 449/1995 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur. The Tribunal passed an award on 29th June 2007 directing the appellants to pay compensation. The appellants filed the present First Appeal No. 784 of 2007 before the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur Bench, which was reserved on 19th July 2022 and pronounced on 26th July 2022.
Acts & Sections
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: Section 166
