Case Note & Summary
The case arises from a motor vehicle accident on 08/01/2013, where the deceased Vikas Bharne was riding a motorcycle and was hit by a tempo coming from the opposite direction. The claimants, being the widow, minor son, and mother of the deceased, filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation of Rs.35,00,000/-. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Baramati, awarded Rs.18,17,000/- with interest at 9% per annum. The Insurance Company appealed, challenging both the finding of negligence and the quantum of compensation. The High Court examined the evidence, including the testimony of an eye witness and police papers, and found that the tempo driver was solely negligent. The court rejected the Insurance Company's argument of contributory negligence, noting that the motorcyclist was on the correct side and the tempo driver was at fault. On quantum, the court upheld the award as just and fair, and the interest rate as reasonable. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Motor Accident Claims - Negligence - Contributory Negligence - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 166 - The claimants alleged that the accident was caused solely due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the tempo. The Insurance Company contended contributory negligence by the motorcyclist. The Tribunal held the tempo driver solely negligent based on evidence of eye witness and police papers. The High Court affirmed, finding no perversity in the finding of fact. (Paras 5-7)
B) Motor Accident Claims - Compensation - Quantum - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 166 - The Tribunal awarded Rs.18,17,000/- with interest at 9% per annum. The Insurance Company challenged the quantum. The High Court upheld the award, noting that the compensation was just and fair, and the interest rate was consistent with prevailing rates. (Paras 8-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal erred in holding the driver of the tempo solely negligent and in awarding compensation of Rs.18,17,000/- with interest at 9% per annum.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and award dated 11/05/2016 passed by the MACT, Baramati in MACP No. 194 of 2013 is upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Motor Accident Claims
- Negligence
- Contributory Negligence
- Compensation
- Interest Rate
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (06) 95
First Appeal (Stamp) No. 31266 of 2016
Smt. Anuja Prabhudessai, J.
Mr. Nikhil Mehta i/b KMC Legal Venture for Appellant; Mr. Tushar Sonawane i/b Mr. Prashant S. Hagare for Respondent Nos.1 to 3; Mr. Rahul S. Kadam for Respondent No.4
Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd.
Ujjwala Vikas Bharne & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeal against judgment and award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Remedy Sought
The appellant/Insurance Company sought to set aside the award of compensation of Rs.18,17,000/- with interest at 9% per annum.
Filing Reason
The Insurance Company challenged the finding of negligence and the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
Previous Decisions
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Baramati, in MACP No. 194 of 2013, awarded compensation of Rs.18,17,000/- with interest at 9% per annum.
Issues
Whether the Tribunal erred in holding the driver of the tempo solely negligent?
Whether the quantum of compensation awarded is excessive?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant/Insurance Company argued that the accident occurred due to contributory negligence of the motorcyclist and that the compensation awarded is excessive.
Respondents/Claimants supported the Tribunal's findings and award.
Ratio Decidendi
The finding of fact regarding negligence based on evidence of eye witness and police papers is not perverse; the Tribunal's award of compensation is just and fair and does not warrant interference.
Judgment Excerpts
The Appellant / Insurance Company has assailed the judgment and award dated 11/05/2016 passed by the MACT, Baramati, Dist. Pune in MACP No. 194 of 2013.
The Respondent No.1 is the widow, the Respondent No.2 is the minor son and the Respondent No.3 is the mother of the deceased Vikas Bharne.
The claimants therefore, filed petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act against the respondent No.4 and the appellant being insurer of the offending vehicle claiming compensation of Rs. 35,00,000/ with interest from the date of the petition till final realization.
Procedural History
The claimants filed MACP No. 194 of 2013 before the MACT, Baramati, which awarded compensation on 11/05/2016. The Insurance Company filed the present appeal before the High Court on an unspecified date. The appeal was heard finally at the stage of admission on 14/06/2019.
Acts & Sections
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: Section 166
