Case Note & Summary
The appeal was filed by The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. against the order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Akot, in Claim Petition No. 77/2005. The claimants, legal heirs of deceased Kailas Kokate, had filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation for his death in a road accident on 09/12/2003. The deceased was a pillion rider on a motorcycle insured with the appellant, which was hit by an unidentified white jeep. The claimants had already received an interim award under Section 140 of the Act. The Tribunal, without any application or amendment, suo moto converted the petition to one under Section 163(A) and awarded compensation of Rs. 3,79,000/-. The insurance company challenged this conversion. The High Court held that the Tribunal had no power to suo moto convert the application from Section 166 to Section 163(A), as the two provisions are distinct and involve different considerations. The court noted that under Section 166, negligence must be proved, while under Section 163(A), compensation is awarded on a structured formula basis without proof of negligence. The claimants had already taken benefit under Section 140, which is an interim measure, and could not be deemed to have opted for Section 163(A). The court set aside the Tribunal's order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration under Section 166, allowing the insurance company to contest the claim on merits.
Headnote
A) Motor Vehicles Act - Conversion of Application - Section 166 to Section 163(A) - Suo Moto Power - The Tribunal cannot suo moto convert an application filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to one under Section 163(A) without the consent of the parties, especially when the claimants have already availed interim benefit under Section 140. The issue raised was whether claimants who filed under Section 166 and received interim compensation under Section 140 are entitled to final compensation under Section 163(A) by suo moto conversion. Held that such conversion is impermissible as it deprives the insurer of the opportunity to contest liability on grounds of negligence. (Paras 1-10)
B) Motor Vehicles Act - Interim Award - Section 140 - Final Compensation - Section 163(A) - The claimants having availed interim benefit under Section 140 cannot be automatically entitled to compensation under Section 163(A) without a proper application or amendment. The Tribunal's order granting compensation under Section 163(A) was set aside as it was beyond its jurisdiction. (Paras 2-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the claimants, who filed an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and availed interim benefit under Section 140, are entitled to compensation under Section 163(A) by the Tribunal suo moto converting the application.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The impugned order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Akot, dated 30/06/2006 is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication of the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 24/07/2017.
Law Points
- Motor Vehicles Act
- 1988
- Section 166
- Section 163(A)
- Section 140
- Suo Moto Conversion
- Interim Award
- Final Compensation
- Legal Heirs
- Pillion Rider
- Unidentified Vehicle
Case Details
2017 LawText (BOM) (06) 184
First Appeal No. 574/2006
Dr. Smt. Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi, J.
Shri Ashish W. Paunikar for appellant, Shri A.B. Mirza for respondent nos.1 to 6
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
Smt. Savita wd/o Kailas Kokate & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
First appeal against the order of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarding compensation under Section 163(A) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by suo moto converting the application filed under Section 166.
Remedy Sought
The appellant insurance company sought setting aside of the Tribunal's order awarding compensation under Section 163(A) and remand for fresh adjudication under Section 166.
Filing Reason
The claimants filed Claim Petition No. 77/2005 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation for the death of Kailas Kokate in a road accident.
Previous Decisions
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Akot, had passed an interim award under Section 140 and later suo moto converted the petition to Section 163(A) and awarded final compensation of Rs. 3,79,000/-.
Issues
Whether the Tribunal can suo moto convert an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to one under Section 163(A) without the consent of the parties?
Whether claimants who have availed interim benefit under Section 140 are entitled to final compensation under Section 163(A) by such conversion?
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant argued that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to suo moto convert the application from Section 166 to Section 163(A) as the two provisions are distinct and the insurer is entitled to contest negligence under Section 166.
The respondents argued that the conversion was justified as the accident involved an unidentified vehicle and the claimants were entitled to the benefit of Section 163(A).
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal has no power to suo moto convert an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to one under Section 163(A) without the consent of the parties, as the two provisions are distinct and involve different legal considerations. Claimants who have availed interim benefit under Section 140 cannot be deemed to have opted for Section 163(A) and are not entitled to final compensation under that provision without a proper application or amendment.
Judgment Excerpts
The issue raised for consideration in this appeal is whether the claimants, who are the legal heirs of the deceased and who have filed the application for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act and having availed an interim benefit under Section 140 of the Act, are entitled to compensation finally under Section 163(A) of the Act, that too by the Tribunal suo moto converting the application filed under Section 166 to Section 163(A) of the Act.
The Tribunal cannot suo moto convert the application from Section 166 to Section 163(A) without the consent of the parties.
Procedural History
The claimants filed Claim Petition No. 77/2005 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Akot. The Tribunal passed an interim award under Section 140. Subsequently, on 30/06/2006, the Tribunal suo moto converted the petition to Section 163(A) and awarded compensation of Rs. 3,79,000/-. The insurance company filed First Appeal No. 574/2006 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging the conversion and award.
Acts & Sections
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: Section 166, Section 163(A), Section 140
