NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. versus SATBIR AND ORS.

Citation: [2009] 6 S.C.R. 1 · Decided: 27-03-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Dismissed
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2009] 6 S.C.R. 1 
' 
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. 
A 
v. 
SATBIR AND ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 1979 of 2009) 
MARCH 27, 2009 
B 
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND ASOK KUMAR 
j. 
GANGULY, JJ.] 
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ~ Motor accident - Death of 
driver of the vehicle - Compensation - Claim of - Tribunal c 
awarding Rs. 1, 50, 0001- in equal shares since there was 
contributory negligence of vehicle and bus driver - Upheld 
by High Court - On appeal, held: Liability of appellant-
assurance company would be half of the amount awarded in 
respect of death of driver of the vehicle - However, owner and D 
insurer of vehicle not impleaded as party in the claim petition 
- As such their liability for any amount in respect of death of 
the driver does not arise :... Thus, order of High Court set aside 
- Matter remitted back for consideration afresh. 
The question which arose for consideration in this E 
appeal was that when the owner and the insurer of the 
.; 
vehicle were not impleaded as party .in claim petition, 
whether they could be made liable for any 11.mount in 
respect of the accident. 
. " 
F 
Disposing of the appeal, the Court 
HELD: It is pointed out that if at all the amount was 
to be paid in respect of the death of 'R' who was the 
... 
deceased and the driver of the vehicle, the liability of the G 
appellant-assurance company would be half of the 
amount awarded i.e. Rs.75,0001- out of Rs.1,50,0001-. The 
owner and the insurer of the vehicle were not impleaded 
as party in the claim petition. That being so, the question 
1 
H 
2 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2009] 6 S.C.R 
A of their being liable for any amount in respect of the 
accident in respect of driver of the vehicle does not arise. 
It appears that the High Court has not taken note of these 
relevant aspects. In the special circumstance the 
impugned order of the High Court is set aside and the 
B matter is remitted back for fresh consideration. [Para 5) 
[3-C-E] 
CIVIL.APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 
1979 of 2009. 
C 
From the Judgment & Order dated 8.10.2004 of the High 
Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in F.A.O. No. 5130 _ 
of 2003. 
' 
Salil Paul and Indra Sawhney for the Appellant. 
D 
Joy Basu, Ruchi Sharda and B.K. Satija for the 
E 
Respondent. 
)I 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted. 
2. Challenge in these appeals is the order passed by the 
Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court 
dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant. The 1st FAO 5130/ 
2003 was filed by the present appellant. Both the appeals were 
F filed by the present appellant (hereinafter referred to as an 
Insurance Company). 
3. Challenge was to the order passed by the Motor 
Accident Claims Tribunal, Hissar (in short MACT). The basic 
challenge was that the MACT while dealing with the claim 
G petition filed, categorically hold that the accident took place due 
to the contributory negligence of TAT A 407 vehicle and the bus 
driver of Haryana Roadways. 
4. It is case of the appellant that there was some mistakes 
H in the order of the MACT as both the present appellant and the 
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. v. SATBIR AND 
3 
ORS. [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.] 
1-
National Insurance Co. Ltd. (in short the National Insurance were A 
treated to be respondents Nos.4 and 5 in the claim petition 
No.80. ·It is also pointed out that having held that there was 
contributory negligence the ultimate direction of the MACT was 
as follows: 
"As held above, since it is a case of contributory B 
negligence, the petitioner are entitled to recover a sum of 
~ 
Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation in equal shares due to the 
-. 
death of Rajesh in the ill-fated accident. All the 
Respondents are liable to pay this amount of c-
compensation jointly and severally. 
. 
· 5. It is pointed out that if at all the amount was to be paid 
in respect of the death of Rajesh who was the deceased and 
=-
the driver of the TAT A 407 vehicle, the liability of the appellant 
- Assurance Company would be half of the amount awarded D 
.. 
i.e. Rs. 75,000/- out of Rs.1,50,000/-. It is pointed out that the 
owner and the insurer of the vehicle were not impleaded as party 
in the claim petition. That being so, the question of their being 
liable for any amount in respect of the accident in respect of 
driver of the vehicle TATA 407 bearing registration No.HR-39-
E 
8008 does not arise. It appears that the High Court has not 
taken note of these relevant aspec
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.