Bombay High Court Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Compensation Award Upheld. Joint liability of insurer and owners for injuries caused by rash and negligent driving of tractor and trolly under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Prosecution
  • 66
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, challenged the judgment and award dated 22.8.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha, in M.A.C.P. No. 179 of 2008. The Tribunal had partly allowed the petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, holding respondent Nos.2 and 3 (owners of the tractor and trolly) along with the appellant-insurance company jointly liable to pay compensation of Rs.96,000 with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization to the injured claimant, Tularam Gaikwad. The facts of the case are that on 25.5.2008 at about 7:00 p.m., the claimant was driving his motorcycle (Hero Honda CD-Delux, Registration No.MH-32/F-0843) with a pillion rider, Ravindra Patil, from Kharsoli to his village Jaurwada (Khurd). When the motorcycle reached Mouza Bela Fata, an offending motor vehicle, a tractor and trolly bearing Registration No.MH-31/BB-4515, driven rashly and negligently, dashed against the motorcycle. As a result, the claimant and the pillion rider fell down, and the claimant sustained injuries to his leg and right hand, including multiple fractures. He was taken to Suretech Hospital and Research Centre for treatment. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence, found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the tractor and trolly by its driver, and awarded compensation. The insurance company appealed, contending that the award was excessive and that the Tribunal erred in holding it liable. The High Court, after hearing the counsel for the appellant, respondent No.1 (claimant), and respondents No.2 to 4 (owners), found no merit in the appeal. The court observed that the Tribunal had correctly assessed the compensation and that the insurance company was jointly liable with the owners. The appeal was dismissed, and the award was confirmed.

Headnote

A) Motor Accident Claims - Compensation for Injuries - Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Claimant sustained multiple fractures due to rash and negligent driving of tractor and trolly - Tribunal awarded Rs.96,000 with interest at 6% p.a. - Insurance company appealed - Held that the award was just and proper, no interference warranted (Paras 1-4).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appellant-insurance company is liable to pay compensation for injuries caused by a tractor and trolly driven rashly and negligently.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal dismissed. The judgment and award dated 22.8.2012 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha, in M.A.C.P. No. 179 of 2008 is confirmed.

Law Points

  • Motor Vehicles Act
  • 1988
  • Section 166
  • Compensation for injuries
  • Joint liability of insurer and owners
  • Negligence in driving tractor-trolly
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2013 LawText (BOM) (12) 115

First Appeal No.574 of 2013

2013-12-03

A. P. Bhangale, J

Shri A.W.Paunikar for Appellant, Shri B.B.Meshram for R-1, Shri H Bobade for R-2 to 4

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited

Tularam S/o Tukaram Gaikwad, Pradeep S/o Vasantrao Wanjari, Sheshrao S/o Govindrao Hirudkar, Sham S/o Bhaiyyaji Deotale

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 under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Remedy Sought

Appellant-insurance company sought to set aside the award of compensation of Rs.96,000 with interest.

Filing Reason

Appellant aggrieved by the award holding it jointly liable with owners for compensation.

Previous Decisions

Tribunal partly allowed the petition, awarded Rs.96,000 with interest at 6% p.a. from date of petition till realization.

Issues

Whether the insurance company is liable to pay compensation for injuries caused by tractor and trolly accident.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the award was excessive and that the Tribunal erred in holding the insurance company liable.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal correctly assessed compensation and held the insurance company jointly liable with the owners for the injuries caused by rash and negligent driving of the tractor and trolly. No interference warranted.

Judgment Excerpts

The appellant is aggrieved by judgment and award dated 22.8.2012, passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha, under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The facts in brief, are thus : that on 25.5.2008, at about 7:00 p.m., claimant-Tularam was driving his motorcycle ... offending motor vehicle i.e. tractor and trolly ... gave dash to the motorcycle driven by the claimant, as tractor and trolly was driven rashly and negligently.

Procedural History

Claimant filed M.A.C.P. No. 179 of 2008 before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha, under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Tribunal partly allowed petition on 22.8.2012. Appellant-insurance company filed First Appeal No.574 of 2013 before Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. High Court dismissed appeal on 3.12.2013.

Acts & Sections

  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: 166
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Gujarat High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Industrial Tribunal's Modification of Punishment in Conductor Misconduct Case. The court held that the Tribunal's reduction of punishment from stoppage of two increments to one increment with permanen...
Related Judgement
High Court Gujarat High Court Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim for Pillion Rider Injured in Tractor Collision — Tribunal's Deduction for Contributory Negligence Set Aside as No Evidence of Rider's Fault.