Bombay High Court Partially Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim Due to Denial of Opportunity of Hearing. Remands Matter to Tribunal for Determination of Breach of Insurance Policy Terms.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR
  • 113
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Swayambhu Construction Pvt. Ltd., filed a first appeal against the judgment and award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhandara, in Claim Petition No.43/2007. The Tribunal had exonerated the insurance company (respondent no.4) and saddled the entire liability on the appellant. The appellant contended that he was not given an opportunity of being heard because his mother had died, and he could not attend the proceedings. He also argued that the vehicle was insured with respondent no.4, but the Tribunal held there was a breach of the insurance policy terms. The High Court, after hearing both sides, admitted the appeal and heard it finally with consent. The court considered the cause for non-appearance and found that the appellant was deprived of an opportunity to lead evidence, particularly to rebut the defence raised by respondent no.3 (the driver). In the interest of justice, the court set aside the award to the extent it exonerated respondent no.4 and saddled liability on the appellant. The court clarified that the only issue to be decided by the Tribunal on remand is whether there was a breach of the insurance policy terms; other issues like income of the deceased, loss of dependency, multiplier, and total compensation were affirmed. The court directed that the amount deposited by the appellant with the Registry be transmitted to the Tribunal for disbursement to the claimants. If the appellant succeeds, he would be entitled to recover the amount from respondent no.4. The parties were directed to appear before the Tribunal on 26.12.2012, and the Tribunal was to decide the petition within six months.

Headnote

A) Motor Accident Claims - Denial of Opportunity of Hearing - Remand for Limited Issue - The appellant was deprived of an opportunity to lead evidence due to the death of his mother, resulting in an ex-parte award. The High Court set aside the award to the extent of the issue of breach of insurance policy terms and remanded the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration on that limited issue, while affirming the quantum of compensation. (Paras 3-6)

B) Insurance Law - Breach of Policy Terms - Liability of Insurer - The Tribunal had exonerated the insurance company (respondent no.4) on the ground of breach of policy terms, but the appellant was not heard. The High Court held that the appellant must be given an opportunity to rebut the defence of breach, and the Tribunal must decide that issue afresh. (Paras 4-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appellant was denied an opportunity of being heard before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, and whether the award exonerating the insurance company and saddling entire liability on the appellant should be set aside.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal succeeds partly. The judgment and award to the extent of exonerating respondent no.4 and saddling entire liability upon the appellant is set aside. Rest of the award (fixing compensation amount) is affirmed. Matter remitted to Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhandara, for decision only on the issue of breach of terms of insurance policy, after giving opportunity to parties. Appellant may file written statement. Amount deposited by appellant to be transmitted to Tribunal for disbursement to claimants. If appellant succeeds, he may recover from respondent no.4. Parties to appear before Tribunal on 26.12.2012. Tribunal to decide within six months.

Law Points

  • Natural justice
  • opportunity of hearing
  • breach of insurance policy terms
  • remand for limited issue
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2012 LawText (BOM) (10) 154

First Appeal No.1043/2012

2012-10-30

M.N. Gilani

Mr. P.P. Kotwal for appellant, Mr. Solao h/f N.S. Talmale for respondent no.1 to 3, Mr. M.R. Kalar for respondent no.4

Swayambhu Construction Pvt. Ltd.

Dhrupada w/o Pandurang Watekar, Pandurang s/o Mahadeo Watekar, Digambar s/o Umakant Vaidya, United India Insurance Company Limited

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

Nature of Litigation

First appeal against judgment and award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in a claim petition for compensation.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought setting aside of the award exonerating the insurance company and saddling entire liability on him.

Filing Reason

Appellant was not given opportunity of being heard before the Tribunal due to death of his mother.

Previous Decisions

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhandara, in Claim Petition No.43/2007, exonerated respondent no.4 (insurance company) and saddled entire liability on the appellant.

Issues

Whether the appellant was denied an opportunity of being heard before the Tribunal. Whether the award exonerating the insurance company and saddling liability on the appellant should be set aside.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant submitted that he could not attend proceedings due to death of his mother. Appellant contended that the vehicle was insured with respondent no.4, but the Tribunal held there was breach of policy terms.

Ratio Decidendi

A party who is denied an opportunity of being heard due to sufficient cause is entitled to have the ex-parte award set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration on the limited issue of breach of insurance policy terms, while affirming the quantum of compensation.

Judgment Excerpts

The only question that has cropped up in this appeal is, the appellant not getting opportunity of being heard while the Claim Petition No.43/2007, was decided. Considering the cause for non appearance of the appellant before the Tribunal and also the fact that appellant was deprived of an opportunity of leading evidence, particularly to rebut the defence raised by the respondent no.3, in the interest of justice, the award exonerating respondent no.4 and saddling the entire liability on the appellant, will have to be set aside.

Procedural History

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhandara, decided Claim Petition No.43/2007 ex parte against the appellant, exonerating the insurance company and saddling liability on the appellant. The appellant filed First Appeal No.1043/2012 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, which was admitted and heard finally with consent.

Acts & Sections

  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Gujarat High Court Dismisses Appeal Challenging Appointment as Joint Director of Horticulture — Postgraduate Degree in Agriculture Not Equivalent to Horticulture Under Recruitment Rules. The court held that the recruitment rule requiring a second c...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Bar Council of India's Explanation to Rule 5 of Legal Education Rules, 2008 Regarding Eligibility of Open University Graduates for LL.B. Course. The court held that a candidate who has not passed 10+2 ...