VIMLA DEVI & ORS. versus NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ORS.

Citation: [2018] 13 S.C.R. 753 · Decided: 16-11-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE · Disposal: Leave Granted & Allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
753
VIMLA DEVI & ORS.
v.
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 11042 of 2018)
NOVEMBER 16, 2018
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE AND INDU MALHOTRA, JJ.]
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988:
s.166 – Fatal accident – Claim petition – The documents filed
in the criminal proceedings in respect of the accident were filed
alongwith the petition – Tribunal dismissed the petition holding that
claimants failed to prove the accident for want of evidence and the
documents produced, since not exhibited, were of no use – High
Court dismissed the appeal – On appeal, held: The Act is a beneficial
piece of legislation – It relieves the victims from ensuring strict
compliance provided in law which are otherwise applicable to the
suits and other proceedings – Claim petition is neither a suit nor an
adversarial lis in the traditional sense – It is regulated by the
provisions of Chapter XII, which is a complete code in itself – The
object of s. 158(6) r/w s.166(4) is to reduce the period of pendency
of claim case by making it mandatory for registration of claim within
one month from the date of receipt of FIR of the accident – Courts
below were not justified in dismissing the claim petition – Claimant
had adduced sufficient evidence to prove the accident and the rash
and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle – Non-
exhibition of the documents was merely a procedural lapse, which
could not be made basis to reject the claim petition – Taking into
consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, the
claimants are held entitled to claim Rs. 11,27,920/- by way of
compensation from the respondents jointly and severally.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD:  1.1 The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is a beneficial
piece of legislation enacted to give solace to the victims of the
motor accident who suffer bodily injury or die untimely. The Act
is designed in a manner, which relieves the victims from ensuring
          753
[2018] 13  S.C.R. 753
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
754
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 13  S.C.R.
strict compliance provided in law, which are otherwise applicable
to the suits and other proceedings while prosecuting the claim
petition filed under the Act for claiming compensation for the
loss sustained by them in the accident. [Para 16][759-B-C]
1.2 The claim petition filed under the Act is neither a suit
nor an adversarial lis in the traditional sense but it is a proceeding
in terms of and regulated by the provisions of Chapter XII of the
Act, which is a complete Code in itself. [Para 24][760-E-F]
United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Shila Datta &
Ors. 2011 (10) SCC 509 : [2011] 14 SCR 763 – relied
on.
1.3 The object of Section 158(6) read with Section 166(4)
of the Act is essentially to reduce the period of pendency of claim
case and quicken the process of determination of compensation
amount by making it mandatory for registration of motor accident
claim within one month from the date of receipt of FIR of the
accident without the claimants having to file a claim petition.
[Para 19][759-G-H; 760-A]
Jai Prakash v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. 2010 (2)
SCC 607 : [2009] 16 SCR 710 – relied on.
1.4 There are three Sections, which empower the Claims
Tribunal to award compensation to the claimant, viz., Section 140,
Section 163-A and Section-166 of the Act.  While claiming
compensation payable under Section 140 and Section 163A of
the Act, the claimant is not required to prove any wrongful act,
neglect or default of the person concerned against whom the claim
is made by virtue of Section 140 (4) and Section 163A ( 2 ) of the
Act. So far as Section 166 of the Act is concerned, it also deals
with payment of compensation. Section 168 of the Act deals with
award of the Claims Tribunal whereas Section 169 of the Act
provides procedure and powers of the Claims Tribunal. [Para 20,
23 and 24][760-C-E]
1.5 In the present case, the approach, reasoning and the
conclusion of the Tribunal and the High Court for dismissing the
appellants’ claim petition/appeal was not in accordance with law
inasmuch as both did not deal with any issue arising in the case.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
755
The High Court while dismissing the appeal simply affirmed the
award of the Tribunal without assigning any reason. [Para 14]
[758-G-H; 759-A]
1.6 The appellants had adduced sufficient evidence to prove
the accident and the rash and negligent driving of the driver of
the offending vehicle, which resulted in death. The appellants
filed material documents

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.