Case Note & Summary
The appellant, K.L. Vidyashankar, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident on 03-10-2015. He also filed an application under Section 140 of the Act seeking interim compensation on the principle of no fault liability. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, by order dated 14-07-2016 in MVC No.5117/2015, kept the Section 140 application in abeyance and disposed it off along with the main matter. Aggrieved, the appellant challenged this order before the High Court of Karnataka. The High Court held that the Tribunal erred in law by not deciding the Section 140 application at the earliest. The court observed that Section 140 provides for interim compensation on the principle of no fault liability, which is a distinct and independent right. The Tribunal is obliged to award such compensation irrespective of the outcome of the main claim petition. The court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and directed the Tribunal to decide the Section 140 application afresh within two months from the date of receipt of the order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all parties.
Headnote
A) Motor Vehicles Act - No Fault Liability - Section 140 - Interim Compensation - The Tribunal cannot keep the application under Section 140 in abeyance and dispose it off along with the main claim petition; it is mandatory to award interim compensation on the principle of no fault liability at the earliest, irrespective of the outcome of the main claim. (Paras 1-5)
B) Motor Vehicles Act - Claim Petition - Section 166 - Main Claim - The right to interim compensation under Section 140 is distinct and independent of the final adjudication under Section 166; the Tribunal must decide the Section 140 application expeditiously. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Tribunal can keep the application under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in abeyance and dispose it off along with the main claim petition, or whether it is obliged to award interim compensation on the principle of no fault liability at the earliest.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 14-07-2016 passed in MVC No.5117/2015 is set aside. The Tribunal is directed to decide the application filed under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 afresh within two months from the date of receipt of the order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all parties.
Law Points
- No Fault Liability
- Interim Compensation
- Section 140 Motor Vehicles Act
- 1988
- Abeyance of Application
- Right to Immediate Relief
Case Details
2017 LawText (KAR) (02) 24
K.L. Vidya Shankar (Party-in-Person) for Appellant, Sri A.N. Krishna Swamy for Respondent 3
Guruprasad G.C., G. Chandrasekharaiah, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeal against order of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal keeping application under Section 140 of Motor Vehicles Act in abeyance.
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought setting aside of the Tribunal's order and direction to award interim compensation under Section 140.
Filing Reason
The Tribunal kept the Section 140 application in abeyance and disposed it off along with the main claim petition, which the appellant challenged as illegal.
Previous Decisions
The Tribunal by order dated 14-07-2016 in MVC No.5117/2015 kept the Section 140 application in abeyance and disposed it off along with the main matter.
Issues
Whether the Tribunal can keep the application under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in abeyance and dispose it off along with the main claim petition?
Whether the Tribunal is obliged to award interim compensation under Section 140 on the principle of no fault liability at the earliest?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the Tribunal erred in law by not deciding the Section 140 application at the earliest and keeping it in abeyance.
Respondent Insurance Company supported the Tribunal's order.
Ratio Decidendi
The application under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for interim compensation on the principle of no fault liability cannot be kept in abeyance and must be decided at the earliest, irrespective of the outcome of the main claim petition under Section 166.
Judgment Excerpts
Appellant being the party-in-person, challenging the order dated 14-07-2016 made in MVC No.5117/2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore rejecting the application filed by him under Section 140 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking interim compensation on the principle of 'No Fault Liability'.
The Tribunal kept the application filed under Section 140 of the Act in abeyance and disposed off along with the main matter. The said order is illegal and cannot be sustained.
Procedural History
The appellant filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and an application under Section 140 for interim compensation. The Tribunal by order dated 14-07-2016 kept the Section 140 application in abeyance and disposed it off along with the main matter. The appellant filed MFA No.5841/2016 before the High Court of Karnataka challenging that order.
Acts & Sections
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: 140, 166, 173(1)
