Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Krishnaji @ Kisanji Ramaji Tadas, filed a first appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the judgment dated 19.01.2011 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha, which allowed the claim petition of respondent no.1, Umesh Rambhau Shrirame, under Section 163A of the Act and awarded compensation of Rs. 2,78,600/-. The respondent no.1, an agricultural labourer, was engaged by the appellant for harvesting soyabean on a thresher machine attached to a tractor belonging to the appellant. On 08.11.2006, while working on the thresher, his right hand was crushed and later amputated. The appellant contended that the accident was not a motor vehicle accident as the thresher is not a motor vehicle, and therefore no compensation was payable under the Motor Vehicles Act. The respondent no.1 argued that the tractor was involved and thus the accident was covered. The court analyzed the facts and found that the accident occurred solely due to the thresher, which is an agricultural implement, and not due to any use of the tractor as a motor vehicle. The court relied on the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Kishore s/o Nandlal Gayre v. Shahid Sh... (incomplete in text) to support the view that a thresher is not a motor vehicle. The court held that the accident did not arise out of the use of a motor vehicle, and thus the claim under Section 163A was not maintainable. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the Tribunal's award.
Headnote
A) Motor Vehicles Act - Accident - Thresher attached to tractor - Section 163A Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The accident occurred when the claimant's hand was crushed in a thresher attached to a tractor, not due to any use of the tractor as a motor vehicle. The court held that the thresher is not a motor vehicle and the accident did not arise out of the use of a motor vehicle, thus no compensation under Section 163A is payable. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an accident involving a thresher attached to a tractor constitutes a motor vehicle accident under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, entitling the claimant to compensation under Section 163A.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. The judgment of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha dated 19.01.2011 is set aside. The claim petition of respondent no.1 is dismissed.
Law Points
- Motor vehicle accident
- thresher not a motor vehicle
- Section 163A Motor Vehicles Act
- 1988
- compensation for agricultural accident
Case Details
2015 LawText (BOM) (04) 145
First Appeal No. 581 of 2011
Shri M. P. Kariya for appellant, Smt N. S. Jog for respondent No. 1, Shri M. M. Agnihotri for respondent No. 3
Krishnaji @ Kisanji Ramaji Tadas
Umesh Rambhau Shrirame, Chintaman Baburao Burande, M/s Apna Tractors
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
First appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against award of compensation under Section 163A.
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought setting aside of Tribunal's award granting compensation to respondent no.1.
Filing Reason
Appellant contended that accident involving thresher attached to tractor was not a motor vehicle accident.
Previous Decisions
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha allowed claim petition on 19.01.2011, awarding Rs. 2,78,600/- compensation.
Issues
Whether the accident involving a thresher attached to a tractor is a motor vehicle accident under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988?
Whether the claimant is entitled to compensation under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that thresher is not a motor vehicle and accident did not arise out of use of motor vehicle, relying on Kishore v. Shahid.
Respondent no.1 argued that tractor was involved and accident was covered under the Act.
Ratio Decidendi
An accident involving a thresher attached to a tractor, where the injury is caused solely by the thresher and not by any use of the tractor as a motor vehicle, does not arise out of the use of a motor vehicle and thus no compensation is payable under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Judgment Excerpts
This appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 takes exception to the judgment dated 19.01.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha allowing the application filed by the respondent no.1 under Section 163A of the said Act and awarding him compensation.
According to the respondent no.1, he was working as an agricultural labourer and was engaged by the appellant for harvesting Soyabean on a thresher machine.
The appellant filed his Written Statement vide Ex. 17 and took the stand that the tractor in question had been purchased on 28.12.2006 from the respondent no.3.
The parties led evidence before the Tribunal and by judgment dated 19.01.2011 the claim petition came to be allowed holding the present appellant and respondent no.2 to be liable jointly and severally to satisfy the claim.
Shri M. P. Kariya, learned counsel appearing for the appellant raised twofold contentions. According to him the accident in which the respondent no.1 suffered injuries as his right hand was partly crushed in the thresher could not be termed to be a motor vehicle accident.
In that regard he placed reliance upon the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court reported in Kishore s/o Nandlal Gayre Vs. Shahid Sh...
Procedural History
Respondent no.1 filed claim petition under Section 163A of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha. Tribunal allowed petition on 19.01.2011 awarding compensation. Appellant filed first appeal under Section 173 of the Act before Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. Appeal heard on April 22, 2015 and judgment delivered on April 30, 2015.
Acts & Sections
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: Section 163A, Section 173
