Chandrakanta Tiwari vs New India Assurance Company Ltd. & Anr.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

8 June 2020

Case No.

Civil Appeal No. 2527 of 2020

Result

Allowed

Bench

R.F. Nariman, Navin Sinha, Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai

Citation

[2020] 5 S.C.R. 868 : 2020 INSC 419

Headnote

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – s.163A – Son of the claimant, allegedly a pillion rider, was killed in a road accident – MACT held C the insurance company liable to pay Rs.1.99 lakhs with 6% interest thereon – Judgment set aside by High Court – Held: Claimant need not plead or establish that the death in respect of which the claim was made, was due to any negligence or default of the owner of the vehicle or of any other person – Thus, it is not relevant that the person insured must be the driver of the vehicle but may well have D been riding with somebody else driving a vehicle which resulted in the death of the person driving the vehicle – High Court wrong in stating that it was necessary u/s.163A to prove that somebody else was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently, as a result of which, the death of the victim would take place – Amount mentioned in MACT’s

judgment to be paid with the correction that the multiplier instead of being 8 is now 17 – Interest also remains the same – Insurance company to pay the amount due to the claimant. Allowing the appeal, the Court

HELD: The claimant need not plead or establish that the death

in respect of which the claim was made, was due to any negligence or default of the owner of the vehicle or of any other person. (emphasis supplied). It is not relevant that the person insured must be the driver of the vehicle but may well have been riding with somebody else driving a vehicle which resulted in the death of the person driving the vehicle. The High Court is clearly wrong in stating that it was necessary under Section 163A to prove that somebody else was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently, as a result of which, the death of the victim would take place. [Paras 12, 13][872-F-H; 873-A]

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. F. NARIMAN, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. On 18.03.2004, an incident took place, by which the son of the claimant, who allegedly was a pillion rider, was killed in a road accident. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dehradun (hereinafter referred to as ‘MACT’) after examining the evidence, came to the conclusion that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 2, who was the owner of the motor vehicle and who was driving the aforesaid motor vehicle. The victim was aged 28 years. Coming to the conclusion that a salary of R

View Subscription Plans →