Whether the claimant can seek compensation for injury due to a motor accident in both U/S 163A and S 166 of the Motor vehicles Act?

Supreme Court in the said judgment clearly held that having regard to the fact that Section 166 of the Act provides for a complete machinery for laying a claim on fault liability, the question of giving an option to the claimant to pursue their claims either under Section 163-A or under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act does not arise. It is held that the remedy for payment of compensation both under Section 163-A and Section 166 being final and independent of each other as statutorily provided, a claimant

cannot pursue his remedies thereunder simultaneously. One must opt/elect to go either for a proceeding under Section 163-A or under Section 166 of the Act, but not under both. {Para 28 }

In my view, the scheme of the Motor Vehicles Act providing for

compensation on the basis of structured formula under Section 163-A read with Second Schedule and compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act is different. Though in the application under Section 166 for compensation, the Tribunal can consider the compensation prescribed under Second Schedule as a guide, Tribunal cannot consider the compensation payable under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act while considering an application under Section 163-A. The Tribunal can award the compensation in an application under Section 163-A only on the basis of structured formula prescribed under Second Schedule appended to the Motor Vehicles

Act, 1988. The Tribunal cannot allow part of the compensation by granting part benefit under Second Schedule appended to the Motor Vehicles Act and partly by awarding compensation payable under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The claimant once having applied for compensation under Section 163-A on the basis of structured formula prescribed under Second Schedule, cannot simultaneously seek compensation also under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.{Para 38 }

There is no merit in the submission of the learned counsel that while awarding just compensation though the application was filed under section 163A, Tribunal was empowered to grant compensation payable under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

FIRST APPEAL NO. 54 OF 2013

ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, Vs Kumar Aftab Nasim Ansari

CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA, J.

PRONOUNCED ON : 26th JUNE, 2020

Citation: 2021(2) MHLJ 295

Leave a Reply

LexCliq

GitHub – Tobi-bams/BTC-Fee-Processor

Anyone can setup an account in 5 seconds and start creating invoices. A novel link is generated for every bill which may be shared with the shopper. At checkout, the shopper is presented with a BIP21 bill that they can pay from a BIP21-enabled wallet (Still not mainstream). Luckily BPP has fallbacks for SegWit P2WPKH […]

Read More
LexCliq

Dental Treatment: Getting Your Pearly whites Looking Wonderful Again

There is not any doubt the fact that dental treatment and service is one thing that strikes fear inside the hearts of many. However, with a little bit of knowledge and knowledge, securing dental hygiene that helps you relax and with out discomfort is something inside everyone’s achieve. Please read on to find out ways […]

Read More
LexCliq

King.com withdraws trademark application for

id=”article-body” class=”row ” section=”article-body” data-component=”trackCWV”> The creator of Candy Crush Saga has filed a request for abandonment with the US Patent and Trademark Office over its attempt to trademark the word “candy”. (Credit: Casino Slots King.com) If you want to make a game about sugary treats, Casino Slots you can breathe a deep sigh of […]

Read More