Motor vehicles accident claims petitions:
These are normally filed u/s 166 or 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (M.V.Act) as the case may be before the M.A.C. Tribunals of which the District Courts are presently designated so.
If the claim based on the negligence of a wrong doer is made by an injured, the claim petition lies under 166(1)(a) and in case the injured died and his legal representatives are seeking the compensation for the death of the deceased in the motor accident, claim lies under 166 (1)(c) of Motor Vehicles Act.
In case of no fault liability, the claim is laid U/s 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act.
The liability to pay compensation in certain cases on the principle of no fault liability arises u/s 140 of that Act.
As per the settled law reiterated in New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Margham Padmavathi (MACMA No. 188 of 2007 decided by the A.P. High Court on 16.12.2014) the driver of the offending vehicle is a necessary party to the claim petition and the non-joinder is fatal to the proceedings.
As per the High Court circular in Roc. No. 4907/E1/97, dt. 25.07.1997, the array of the respondent in case the respondent is a corporation shall be proper with full details as contemplated in the Order 29 C.P.C.
As per the High Court Circular Roc. No. 5689/98/OP Cell-E dt. 11.04.2000, every claim petition filed under the Motor Vehicle Act should require to have an affidavit filed by the claim petitioner swearing that similar application is not filed before any other Forum or Tribunal seeking compensation. U/s 168(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Who can file a claim?
In case of damage to property, the application for compensation has to be made by the owner of the property damaged. It is implied that in case of death of owner of the property, the legal representatives of the deceased owner can competently claim compensation. 8 [Dr. R. G. Chaturvedi, “Law of Motor Accident Claims and Compensation” (2010) p.642) Apart from that :
1. People, who have been injured in accidents on the road, can themselves file for compensation or route the claims through their advocates.
2. But accident victims, who are below 18 years of age, cannot file for compensation themselves; they have to go through their natural or legal guardians.
3. Legal heirs of people who have died in accidents can also claim compensation; alternatively, they can route their claims through their advocates.
It has been held in Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009) 6 S.C.C. 121 as
under:
“Further, subject to evidence to the contrary, the father is likely to have his own
income and will not be considered as a dependent and the mother alone will be
considered as a dependent. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, brothers and
sisters will not be considered as dependents, because they will either be independent
and earning, or married, or be dependent on the father. Thus even if the deceased is
survived by parents and siblings, only the mother would be considered to be a
dependent…….
In view of the judgment of Supreme Court in Manjuri Bera vs. Oriental Insurance Company
(2007) 10 S.C.C. 643, even the brothers or father would be entitled to the compensation under
section 140 of Motor Vehicles Act, because the liability under section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act
does not cease because there is absence of dependency. Moreover, the legal heirs who were not
dependent on the deceased would be entitled to compensation for loss of estate. But an appeal filed by
the injured- claimants for personal injuries cannot be continued by his legal heirs as stated in the case
of Smt. Ram Ashari vs. H.R.T.C, 2005 (1) Sim LC 359 except in respect of the pecuniary heads. V.
Mepherson and Anr. v. Shiv Charan Singh &Ors. 1 (1998) ACC 6 relied on judgment of Punjab
and Haryana High Court in Joti Ram &Ors. v. Chaman Lal &Ors. 1984 ACJ 645 and held that in a
claim for damages for injuries suffered by a deceased, the claim so far as it relates to non-pecuniary
damages, i.e. pain and suffering etc suffered by the injured would abate on the death of the injured. The
right to sue would survive in case of the pecuniary damages which could be on account of special diet,
purchase of medicines, conveyance etc. This has been reiterated in Bajaj Allianz General Insurance
Company Ltd. v. Kamla Bist III (2010) ACC 55 and in Rajani Sharma & Ors. v. Bodhu & Ors.
MAC. APP.877/2010 and National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Smt. Rajani Sharma &Ors. MAC.
APP.49/2011 decided on 15.10.2012.
What all documents should accompany the petition?
1. Copy of the FIR registered in connection with the accident, if any or the DD entry.
2. Copy of the MLC/Post Mortem Report/Death Report as the case may be.
3. The documents of identity of the victim or the claimants and of the deceased in a death case.
4. Original bills of expenses incurred on the treatment alongwith treatment record.
5. Documents of the educational qualifications of the deceased, if any.
6. Disability Certificate, if already obtained, in an injury case. (Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Raji Devi, (2008) 5 SCC 736 and FAO No. 49 of 2009, decided on 4/07/2011, titled as New India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Smt. Sarita Devi)
7. The proof of income of the deceased/injured.
8. Documents about the age of the victim.
9. The cover note or the insurance policy, if any.
10. An affidavit detailing the relationship of the claimants with the deceased along with documentary proof.
11. Copy of Driving License of the driver,
12. RC of the offending vehicle and other documents such as permit, if any.
13. Copy of charge sheet, if available, along with copy of site plan, mechanical inspection report of the vehicle.
Jurisdiction of Claims Tribunal.
A plain reading of Section 166(2) shows the legislative intent to leave the filing of the claim petition totally at the option of the claimant, either to the claims tribunal having jurisdiction over the area where the accident took place, or to such tribunal within local limits of whose jurisdiction the claimant resides or carries on business or within local limits of whose jurisdiction the defendant resides. In other words, the claimant can file an application within the jurisdiction of claims tribunal:1. Where the accident occurred, or
2. Before the tribunal within local limits of whose jurisdiction, the claimant resides or carries on his business, or
3. Within local limits of whose jurisdiction, the defendant resides.
In Sanno Devi v. Balram [2007, ACJ 1881 (MP) DB] it was held that jurisdiction of tribunal depends essentially on the fact whether there had been any use of motor vehicle and once it has been established, tribunal’s jurisdiction cannot be held ousted on findings that it is negligence of other joint tortfeasor and not of the motor vehicle in question.
In Mantoo Sarkar v. Oriental Insurance C. Ltd (2009 ACJ 564) it was held by the Supreme
Court of India that a victim of an accident arising out of use of motor vehicles may file a claim application
to the Claims Tribunal within local limits of whose jurisdiction the claimant resides or carries on business.
While it has been held that the provision would not allow the filing of the petition in the Claims Tribunal
within whose jurisdiction the defendant carries on business, it was laid down that the petition could be
filed where the policy issuing office of the insurance company is located (New India Assurance Co.
Ltd. v Kutiswar Pramanik & Another, 2010 ACJ 1749). The Supreme Court, in a recent judgement
in Malati Sardar v. National Insurance Company Limited Civil Appeal No.10 of 2016 decided
on 5.1.2016 has held that there is no bar to a claim petition being filed at a place where the insurance
company, which is the main contesting party in such cases, has its business.
As regards an accident occurring in a foreign country, the legal position is that a suit or proceeding
can be filed in a court or tribunal having jurisdiction in relation with the place where the cause of action
or part thereof had arisen (Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 20). Where a bus was booked at
Delhi, part of cause action had arisen in India and it was held that the claimants could file a claim in the
tribunal having jurisdiction over the place of residence of the claimant under section 166(2) of the Act
(Sarbati v. Anil Kumar, 2006 ACJ 2532 (P&H). In the above case, a bus for pilgrimage from Delhi
to Kathmandu was booked at Delhi and the vehicle was registered in India. The bus fell into a river in
the territory of Nepal. It was held that a claim under section 163A of the Act was maintainable in a
tribunal within the State of Punjab. It was further held that the Motor Vehicles Operations and Contiguous Counties Rules, 1963 had no application, since the rules could operate only if the claim was filed in
Nepal. Eventually, the insurer was held liable.
Section 175 of the Act, 1988 bars the jurisdiction of Civil Courts where any Claims Tribunal
has been constituted in respect of “any question relating to any claim for compensation which
may be adjudicated upon by the Claims tribunal for that area, and no injunction in respect of
any action taken or to be taken by or before the Claims Tribunal in respect of the claim for
compensation shall be granted by the Civil Court”
FEE PAYABLE
475. Fees :- (1) Every application under sub-section (1) of Section 166 of the Act for payment of compensation shall be accompanied by a fee in the form of court fee stamps as specified below:
(a) If the claim is confined to special damage, only Re.1;
(b) If the claim includes general damages also, an ad valorem fee at the following rates, on the aggregate of the claims for special and general damages:
Amount of Claim | Amount of Court fee |
| UP to 10,000/- Rs.10 Upto Rs. 10,000 to 50,000/- | 1/4 % of the amount of claim |
| From Rs .50,000 to 1,00,000 | 1/2 % of the amount of claim |
| Above Rs.1,00,000 | 1 % of the amount of claim |
Explanation:- For the purpose of the above sub-rule;
(i) ‘Special damages’ is one which has to be specially pleaded and proved. It consists of out of pocket expenses and loss of earning incurred down to the date of trial, and is generally capable of exact substantial calculations; and
(ii) ‘General damages’ is one which the law implies and which is not specially pleaded. It includes compensation for pain and suffering and like and if the injuries suffered are such as to lead to continuing or permanent disability, compensation for loss of earning power.
(2) The Claims Tribunal may in its discretion exempt a party form the payment of fee prescribed under sub-rule (1):
Provided that where a claim of party has been accepted by the Claims Tribunal, the party shall have to pay the prescribed fee, exemption in respect of which has been granted initially before a copy of the judgment is obtained.
No comments:
Post a Comment