PURNYA KALA DEVI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM
LAWS(SC)-2014-4-21
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: GAUHATI)
Decided on
April 07,2014
PURNYA KALA DEVI
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ASSAM
Respondents
Cited Judgements :-
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD VS. RANI [LAWS(MAD)-2019-4-301] [REFERRED TO]JANG BAHADUR DHAWAN VS. KRISHAN KUMAR AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2018-3-175] [REFERRED TO]
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD VS. SHRESTHA & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2018-9-191] [REFERRED TO]
CHAMAN LAL VS. MURAT RAM [LAWS(HPH)-2020-2-3] [REFERRED TO]
ROOP SINGH VS. DHARAM DASS [LAWS(HPH)-2017-5-20] [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA VS. JAGBIR SINGH [LAWS(SC)-2015-4-40] [REFERRED TO]
NAVEEN KUMAR VS. VIJAY KUMAR AND ORS [LAWS(SC)-2018-2-11] [REFERRED TO]
MEVA LAL VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2020-11-109] [REFERRED TO]
APNA FINANCE (IDEA) LTD. VS. UPPALAPATI RAMANA AND OTHERS [LAWS(APH)-2016-4-66] [REFERRED TO]
PUNGU DEVI AND ORS VS. HIRDU RAM AND ORS [LAWS(HPH)-2018-5-198] [REFERRED TO]
AMRIT PAUL SINGH & ANR VS. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD [LAWS(SC)-2018-5-51] [REFERRED TO]
V PARAMESWARAN VS. P RANI [LAWS(MAD)-2014-11-267] [REFERRED TO]
M/S MAGMA LEASING LIMITED VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2017-2-218] [REFERRED TO]
HDFC BANK LTD VS. KUMARI RESHMA [LAWS(SC)-2014-12-2] [REFERRED TO]
RELIANCE GENERAL INS. CO. LTD VS. KARIBAI [LAWS(MPH)-2020-11-107] [REFERRED TO]
IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. RAMWATI BAI AND ORS. [LAWS(MPH)-2019-9-259] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. JAMMU MOTORS PVT. LIMITED VS. NEELAM KUMARI [LAWS(J&K)-2017-11-12] [REFERRED TO]
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD VS. PUSHPA [LAWS(BOM)-2014-10-175] [REFERRED TO]
A P STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. HAZEERA BEGUM AND OTHERS [LAWS(APH)-2015-12-77] [REFERRED]
MAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-12-463] [REFERRED TO]
PUNGU DEVI AND ORS VS. HIRDU RAM AND ORS [LAWS(HPH)-2018-5-102] [REFERRED TO]
T RAMA KRISHNA VS. VALLURI BABU RAO AND 3 OTHERS [LAWS(APH)-2016-8-46] [REFERRED]
YUGAL KISHORE SHARMA & OTHERS VS. SUKH RAI SINGH AND OTHERS [LAWS(HPH)-2016-12-84] [REFERRED TO]
VIJAY KUMAR VS. RAKESH ALIAS MINTU ALIAS BINTU (P&H) [LAWS(P&H)-2016-1-651] [REFERRED TO]
BALAMANOHARI VS. VENKATESWARA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING [LAWS(MAD)-2018-4-743] [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA BHARTI VS. NAROTTAM MISHRA AND ORS. [LAWS(MPH)-2016-3-10] [REFERRED TO]
K.R.KUTTAPPAN VS. ANANDAKKUTTAN [LAWS(KER)-2021-3-268] [REFERRED TO]
ANWAR HUSSAIN VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2020-3-77] [REFERRED TO]
RUMA BHUYAN VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2017-1-54] [REFERRED TO]
MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.S.R.T.C. VS. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. [LAWS(SC)-2015-10-86] [REFERRED TO]
N S PALANI VS. SULACHANA [LAWS(MAD)-2017-10-289] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)This appeal is directed against the impugned final judgment and order dated 04.01.2007 passed by the Gauhati High Court in MAC Appeal No. 30 of 2003 whereby the High Court held that the claimant/appellant herein is entitled to a sum of Rs. 1,94,400/- as compensation for the death of her husband in the motor vehicle accident and the same is payable by Abdul Salam-who was the registered owner of the vehicle at the relevant point of time and not by the State Government.
(2.)Brief Facts:
a) The appellant/claimant is a widow and mother of four children. On 16.02.1993, at about 10:15 a.m., the claimant's husband died in a road accident by a speeding bus belonging to Md. Abdul Salam which was not insured and was under requisition of the State Government at the relevant time.
b) The appellant filed MAC Case No. 34 of 1993 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (in short 'the Tribunal'), Darrang, Mangaldai for compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- against the registered owner Md. Abdul Salam. Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Udalguri and the State of Assam were also impleded as parties in the said case.
c) The registered owner of the vehicle filed his reply contending that at the relevant time the vehicle was under requisition of the State Government and, hence, the liability to pay compensation is that of the State Government. The SDO, Udalguri, Respondent No. 2 herein, on his behalf and on behalf of the State Government, filed a written statement denying any of its liability and averred that "the vehicle was released on the same date at 10.30". The SDO further averred that "as per the police report, in the absence of driver, the Handiman of the mini bus drove the bus without any permission from the police and occurred the accident".
d) By judgment dated 11.07.2002, the Tribunal directed the registered owner to pay a sum of Rs. 1,41,400/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum to the appellant/claimant and absolved Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein from any liability.
e) Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed MAC Appeal No. 30 of 2003 in the Gauhati High Court not only for higher compensation but also for absolving Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein from any liability.
f) By impugned order dated 04.01.2007, though the High Court enhanced the compensation by Rs. 50,000/-, it was held that the State Government cannot be held liable for paying compensation to the appellant under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short "the 1988 Act") because the liability to pay compensation under the said Act is upon the registered owner, insurer or driver of the vehicle or all or any of them.
g) Aggrieved by such direction, the appellant has filed this appeal by way of special leave.
(3.)Heard Mr. Jatin Zaveri, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Navnit Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents.
Contentions:
(2.)Brief Facts:
a) The appellant/claimant is a widow and mother of four children. On 16.02.1993, at about 10:15 a.m., the claimant's husband died in a road accident by a speeding bus belonging to Md. Abdul Salam which was not insured and was under requisition of the State Government at the relevant time.
b) The appellant filed MAC Case No. 34 of 1993 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (in short 'the Tribunal'), Darrang, Mangaldai for compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- against the registered owner Md. Abdul Salam. Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Udalguri and the State of Assam were also impleded as parties in the said case.
c) The registered owner of the vehicle filed his reply contending that at the relevant time the vehicle was under requisition of the State Government and, hence, the liability to pay compensation is that of the State Government. The SDO, Udalguri, Respondent No. 2 herein, on his behalf and on behalf of the State Government, filed a written statement denying any of its liability and averred that "the vehicle was released on the same date at 10.30". The SDO further averred that "as per the police report, in the absence of driver, the Handiman of the mini bus drove the bus without any permission from the police and occurred the accident".
d) By judgment dated 11.07.2002, the Tribunal directed the registered owner to pay a sum of Rs. 1,41,400/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum to the appellant/claimant and absolved Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein from any liability.
e) Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed MAC Appeal No. 30 of 2003 in the Gauhati High Court not only for higher compensation but also for absolving Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein from any liability.
f) By impugned order dated 04.01.2007, though the High Court enhanced the compensation by Rs. 50,000/-, it was held that the State Government cannot be held liable for paying compensation to the appellant under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short "the 1988 Act") because the liability to pay compensation under the said Act is upon the registered owner, insurer or driver of the vehicle or all or any of them.
g) Aggrieved by such direction, the appellant has filed this appeal by way of special leave.
(3.)Heard Mr. Jatin Zaveri, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Navnit Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents.
Contentions:
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.