Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Rameshbhai Gordhanbhai Dhaduk, was the original claimant in a motor accident claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Rajkot. He filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation for injuries sustained in a vehicular accident that occurred on 16.03.2008. The appellant was driving a truck bearing registration No.GJ-8U-1648 when another truck (GJ-10-W-6237) driven by respondent No.3 and an Eicher tempo (GJ-17-X-4922) driven by respondent No.6 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed with his truck, causing grievous injuries to him. The learned Tribunal dismissed the claim petition for default on 19.07.2017, without considering the merits of the case. Aggrieved by this dismissal, the appellant preferred the present first appeal before the High Court of Gujarat. The High Court examined the impugned judgment and award and found that the Tribunal had erred in dismissing the claim petition for default without adjudicating the matter on merits. The Court held that the Tribunal ought to have decided the claim petition on its merits, especially since the claimant had a right to be heard. The Court also noted that the fact that the claimant was a driver of one of the vehicles involved in the accident does not bar him from claiming compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and award, and remanded the matter back to the learned Tribunal for fresh adjudication on merits, directing the Tribunal to decide the claim petition afresh in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties.
Headnote
A) Motor Accident Claims - Dismissal for Default - Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Claim Petition dismissed for non-prosecution - Held that the Tribunal ought not to have dismissed the claim petition for default without considering the merits of the case, as the claimant had a right to be heard on merits. The appeal was allowed and the matter was remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication on merits. (Paras 1-8) B) Motor Accident Claims - Driver as Claimant - Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Claimant was driver of one of the vehicles involved in accident - Held that the fact that the claimant was a driver does not disentitle him from claiming compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, as the Act does not bar a driver from being a claimant. (Paras 2-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the learned Tribunal was justified in dismissing the Claim Petition for default without considering the merits of the case, and whether the claimant being the driver of one of the vehicles involved in the accident is entitled to claim compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and award dated 19.07.2017 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Rajkot, in M.A.C.P. No. 1102 of 2008 is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the learned Tribunal for fresh adjudication on merits. The learned Tribunal is directed to decide the claim petition afresh in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cannot dismiss claim petition for default without considering merits
- Claimant being driver of one of the vehicles does not bar claim under Motor Vehicles Act
- 1988
- Tribunal must decide claim on merits even if claimant fails to appear
- Appeal against dismissal for default is maintainable
