Case Note & Summary
The present appeal was filed by the New India Assurance Company Limited, the original respondent in a motor accident claim petition, challenging the judgment and award dated 28-08-2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Beed, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 90 of 2013. The claim petition was filed by Vishal Rameshwar Mote and Pratibha Rameshwar Mote, the children of the deceased Anita Rameshwar Mote, under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The facts reveal that on 28-11-2012, Anita was travelling in a Max Jeep bearing registration No. MH-44/B-076 to Sultanpur for labour work. Due to the driver's negligence, the jeep lost control, hit a bridge wall, and toppled, causing severe injuries to Anita, who later succumbed to her injuries while being taken to Aurangabad. The deceased was a 30-year-old widow who looked after her children and earned Rs. 200 per day (Rs. 6,000 per month) by doing household work. The claimants initially claimed Rs. 9,64,000 but restricted it to Rs. 6,00,000 for court fee purposes. The jeep was owned by respondent No. 1 and insured with the appellant Insurance Company. The Tribunal allowed the claim petition, awarding compensation against the Insurance Company. The Insurance Company appealed, contending that the deceased was a gratuitous passenger and that the policy did not cover such passengers, and that the income assessment was excessive. The court analyzed the evidence and found that the Insurance Company failed to prove any willful breach of policy conditions. The court also upheld the Tribunal's assessment of the deceased's income at Rs. 6,000 per month, noting that the claimants had claimed that amount and the Tribunal's finding was not perverse. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the award was confirmed.
Headnote
A) Motor Accident Claims - Gratuitous Passenger - Liability of Insurer - Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The appeal by the Insurance Company challenging the award of compensation for the death of a gratuitous passenger was dismissed. The court held that the insurer failed to prove any willful breach of policy conditions, and the deceased being a gratuitous passenger does not absolve liability if the policy covers third-party risks. (Paras 1-10) B) Assessment of Income - Housewife - Notional Income - Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The Tribunal's assessment of the deceased's income at Rs. 6,000 per month based on her household work was upheld. The court noted that the claimants had claimed Rs. 200 per day, and the Tribunal's finding was reasonable and not perverse. (Paras 2-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation for the death of a gratuitous passenger in a Max Jeep, and whether the Tribunal correctly assessed the income of the deceased housewife at Rs. 6,000 per month.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Beed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 90 of 2013 dated 28-08-2018 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Motor Vehicles Act
- 1988
- Section 166
- Compensation for death of housewife
- Gratuitous passenger
- Breach of policy conditions
- Burden of proof on insurer
- Notional income assessment
