Case Note & Summary
The case involves appeals filed by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. against the judgment and award dated 18/10/2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chinthamani, in MVC No. 75/2004 and MVC No. 84/2004, awarding compensation of Rs.9,20,000 and Rs.4,50,000 respectively with interest at 6% p.a. The appeals were clubbed with MFA No. 1090/2009 and Misc. Cvl. 2621/2009 filed by the owner of the vehicle, Sri. Rohith @ Rohith Mankotia. The facts are that on 22/06/2003, a car bearing registration No. KA-04-M-1234 driven by Sri. Yousurf Basha collided with a motorcycle, resulting in the death of two persons. The legal representatives of the deceased filed claim petitions. The Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the car driver and awarded compensation. The Insurance Company appealed, contending that the driver did not have a valid driving license and that the quantum was excessive. The owner of the car also appealed, challenging the liability. The High Court, after considering the evidence, held that the driver did not possess a valid driving license, but the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation to third parties, with a right to recover from the owner. On quantum, the Court reduced the compensation for lack of proof of income and applied a notional income. The Court also found contributory negligence on the part of the motorcyclist and apportioned negligence at 50% each. The appeals were partly allowed, modifying the awards.
Headnote
A) Motor Vehicles Act - Appeal against Award - Section 173(1) MV Act - The Insurance Company challenged the award of compensation on the ground that the driver did not have a valid driving license and that the quantum was excessive. The Court held that the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation but can recover the same from the owner of the vehicle if there is a breach of policy conditions. (Paras 1-10) B) Motor Vehicles Act - Quantum of Compensation - Proof of Income - The claimants failed to produce satisfactory evidence regarding the income of the deceased. The Court reduced the compensation by applying a notional income of Rs.3,000 per month for the deceased who was a coolie, and Rs.4,500 per month for the deceased who was a businessman, and applied multiplier of 16 and 17 respectively. (Paras 11-20) C) Motor Vehicles Act - Contributory Negligence - The accident occurred due to the negligence of both the driver of the car and the motorcyclist. The Court apportioned negligence at 50% each, and accordingly reduced the compensation payable by the Insurance Company. (Paras 21-25)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Tribunal was correct in awarding compensation of Rs.9,20,000 and Rs.4,50,000 in the respective claim petitions, and whether the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation despite the driver not possessing a valid driving license.
Final Decision
The appeals were partly allowed. The compensation awarded in MVC No. 75/2004 was reduced from Rs.9,20,000 to Rs.4,32,000, and in MVC No. 84/2004 from Rs.4,50,000 to Rs.2,16,000, with interest at 6% p.a. The Insurance Company was directed to pay the compensation and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Motor Vehicles Act
- 1988
- Section 173(1)
- Section 147
- Section 149
- contributory negligence
- quantum of compensation
- proof of income
- multiplier method
- future prospects
- no fault liability
