Simultaneous proceedings -- Simultaneous proceedings u/s 163-A and Section 166 of the Act cannot be undertaken as the remedies therein are separate and independent -- Remedy provided u/s 163-A is on the basis of no-fault liability -- Said proceedings are final in nature unlike those u/s Section 140 of the Act.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 26.03.2021

Second claim petition – Maintainability of -- In appeal it was held that petition u/s 163-A was not maintainable as income of the claimant was much more than Rs. 40,000/- p.a. – Under the circumstances, there was no bar upon the claimant to file a petition u/s 166 of the Act on the basis of fault liability -- If the claimant had taken benefit of the award passed on the petition u/s 163-A of the Act and had then filed a petition u/s 166 of the Act, the petition u/s 166 of the Act was barred.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 26.03.2021

Pleaded that the deceased was driver and his monthly income was Rs.3,000/- -- Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.2,000/- per month, while treating him as a manual worker – So, the claim petition was maintainable u/s 163-A of the Act – Deceased was 28 years of age and was bachelor – Multiplier of ‘17’ should be applied, deduction of 50% is to be made towards his personal and living expenses – Funeral expenses assessed at Rs.15,000/- and loss of estate as Rs.15,000/- and compensation on account of loss of consortium, declined as the same is available only to the spouse – Compensation for future prospects assessed at Rs.9,600/- for 2 years – Total amount of compensation comes out to be Rs.2,43,600/-.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 30.06.2020

Compensation in Motor vehicle accident case u/s 163-A – Role of negligence -- Sole submission by Insurance company that as the deceased himself contributed to the happening of accident, claimants are not entitled for compensation to the negligence attributed to the deceased – Held, contention is not meritorious because in a claim filed u/s 163-A of the Act, the Tribunal cannot examine if the occurrence is result of default or neglect of victim or deceased – Appeal fails and accordingly dismissed.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 17.02.2020

Motor vehicle accident case – Third party – Deceased/Driver borrowed vehicle met with accident – Claim against owner/Insurance company – Maintainability of – Deceased cannot be said to be third party and cannot maintain a claim u/s 163-A of the Act as deceased has stepped into the shoes of the owner of the vehicle -- Claim petition u/s 163A of the Act against the owner and insurance company shall not be maintainable -- Claimants shall be entitled to a sum of Rs.1 lakh only as per the terms of the contract of insurance with interest @ 7.5 per cent per annum from the date of the claim petition till realization.

(SC) Decided on: 07.01.2020

There are three Sections, which empower the Claims Tribunal to award compensation to the claimant, viz., Section 140, Section 163A and Section 166 of the Act -- Section 140 deals with the cases for award of compensation based on the principle of no fault liability -- Section 163A of the Act deals with special provisions as to payment of compensation and is based on structured formula as specified in Second Schedule appended to 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.

(SC) Decided on: 16.11.2018

Liability of Insurance Company with recovery rights -- In case of death in an accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle, the legal heirs of the deceased are entitled to Rs.50,000/- as compensation for liability without fault -- It has been made Rs.50,000/- by Amending Act No.54 of 1994 with effect from 14.11.1994 from Rs.25,000/- -- Accident occurred earlier to 1994 i.e. on 23.6.1991 – Rs.25,000/- is liable to be granted to the appellants -- Though the liability of the Insurance Company as per its policy is limited to Rs.20,000/-, however, it is liable to pay the entire amount and recover the excess amount from the insured.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 06.05.2015

Accident by borrower of owner -- Third party policy -- Deceased was borrower of the motorcycle, therefore, he stepped into shoes of the owner and cannot be treated as third party -- Thus, the claimants are not entitled to the compensation u/s 163-A of the M.V. Act, though the claimants are entitled to compensation for 'no fault liability' u/s 140 of the M.V. Act – Rs. 50,000/- awarded for ‘no fault liability’.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 26.03.2015

It has not been denied that the accident has not taken place -- Insurance Company admitted to pay compensation at earlier stage -- In such circumstances, the Tribunal was just in allowing the application u/s 140 of the Act.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 14.01.2015