LexDEEPAL GIRISHBHAI SONI AND ORS. versus UNITED INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., BARODA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
DEEPAL GIRISHBHAI SONI AND ORS . A . ..\: v. UNITED INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., BARODA MARCH I 8, 2004 [Y.N. KHARE, CJ., S.B. SINHA AND S.H. KAPADIA, JJ.] B Motor Vehicles Act, J 988 Sections 163-A and J 66-Award passed under a proceeding under section c 163-A of the Act-Bench of two judges referring the matter to a larger Bench doubting the correctness of the decision in Oriental Insurance Co. ltd v. Hansrajbhai V. Koda/a and Ors., 12001 J 5 SCC 175, wherein it was held that the award passed under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is a final award and not interim in nature"-correctness of-Affirming the Koda/d's case, the three Judges Bench held, Parliament inserted section 163-A to the D Act for quick and efficacious relief by granting compensation on the basis of a structured formula envisaged under Second Schedule to the Act considering all relevant particulars and without insisting for the proof of negligence in causing the accident-Remedies envisaged under sections 163-A and 166 of the Act are distinct and separate and are both final remedies-Claimant cannot pursue both the remedies. E Sections 140 and 163-A-Held, compensation paid under section 140 is ad-hoc in nature which shall be reduced/adjusted from the amount of compensation payable under the said Section or Section 163-A of the Act- Claim under section 140 is in addition to any other claim which may be made F under any other law for the time being in force. 4. A Ben.ch of two judges referred the appeal to a larger Bench of three judges doubting the correctness of the decision rendered by a Bench of two judges in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Hansrajbhai V. Koda/a and Ors., [2001) 5 SCC 175, wherein it was held that the award passed under Section G 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is a final award and not interim in nature and that the claimants are debarred from making further claims on the basis of fault liability under section 166 of the Act. Two review .l( petitions seeking review of the judgement in Koda/a 's case and another simil:ir appeal were also tagged with the main appeal. 213 H 214 Slil'REME COURT R1:ro1ns 1200~1 o S.l'.R. A The claimants/appellants contended that the award under section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is ~n interim award granting only 'adequate and rational compensation' on a structured formula and not a final award; that, the actual loss suffered by the victim is not adjudicated upon in Section 163-A proceeding; that the Act is a beneficial legislation B and it should be construed liberally; that an award of 'just compensation' envisaged under section 166 of the Act cannot be denied by treating the award under section 163-A of the Act as a final award; that the ceiling provided in Second Schedule indicates that the compensation payable under Section 163-A is interim in nature which would be adjusted when a final award is passed under section 166 of the Act; that the proceedings C envisaged under sections 140 and 163-A of the Act are alternative to each other; that the Bench in Koda/a 's case did not consider the legislative history of the Act and misinterpreted and misconstrued the expression 'any other law' appearing in Section 140(5) of the Act; and that the said expression also includes other provisions of the Act since the remedies provided under section 163-A and 166 of the Act are distinct and separate. D The respondents contended that by enacting Section 163-A of the Act, the Parliament intended to make an exception to the provisions of section 166 of the Act for the purpose of implementing the principles of social justice; and that the award under section 163-A of the Act is a final award E and not interim in nature for the fact that under the Second Schedule to the Act, one third of the total income is excluded from the total amount F of compensation and that certain provisions relevant for total amount of compensation payable have been provided. Dismissing the appeals and the review petitions, the Court HELD: I.I. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is in the nature ofa social welfare legislation. Section 140 of the Act deals with interim compensation. By inserting Section 163-A, the Parliament intended to provide for making of an award consisting of a pre-determined sum without insisting on a long- drawn trial or without proof of negligence in causing the accident. The G Amendment was, thus, a deviation from the common law
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.