Shashi and Others vs Mohan Varshney and Others

J.R. Midha

The appellants have challenged the order of the Claims Tribunal whereby their claim petition has been dismissed as not maintainable. On 28th June, 2005 at about 1:35 pm, the deceased was travelling as a pillion rider on motorcycle bearing No. UP-81-Q6549 and his brother was driving the said motorcycle. When the said motorcycle reached in front of Sai Vihar Colony, Aligarh, U.P., three persons riding on a motorcycle with an intention to snatch the motorcycle and bag of cash came from behind and shot gun injuries resulting in death of the deceased. The deceased was survived by his wife, three sons and parents who filed the claim petition before the Claims Tribunal.

The Claims Tribunal dismissed the claim petition as not maintainable without conducting any inquiry. In Mayur Arora v. Amit, (2011) 1 TAC 878, this Court has held that the Claims Tribunal has to conduct an inquiry to find out the truth. The findings of this Court are reproduced hereunder:-

10.1. The inquiry contemplated u/s 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is different from a trial. The inquiry contemplated u/s 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act arises out of a complaint filed by a victim of the road accident or an AIR filed by the police u/s 158(6) of the Motor Vehicles Act which is treated as a claim petition u/s 166(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act. These provisions are in the nature of social welfare legislation. Most of the victims of the road accident belong to the lowest strata of the society and, therefore, duty has been cast upon the police to report the accident to the Claims Tribunal and the Claims Tribunal is required by law to treat the Accident Information Report filed by Police as a claim petition. Upon receipt of report from the police or a claim petition from the victim, the Claims Tribunal has to ascertain the facts which are necessary for passing the award. To illustrate, in the case of death of a victim in a road accident, the Tribunal has to ascertain the factum of the accident; accident having being caused due to rash and negligent driving; age, occupation and income of the deceased; number of legal representatives and their age. If the claimants have not produced copies of the record of the criminal case before the Claims Tribunal, the Claims Tribunal is not absolved from the duty to ascertain the truth to do justice and the Claims Tribunal can summon the investigating officer along with the police record.

In the facts and circumstances of this case, the order of the Claims Tribunal is liable to be set aside and the case is to be remanded back to the Claims Tribunal for conducting a fresh inquiry.

For the reasons as aforesaid, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remanded back to the Claims Tribunal for fresh inquiry. The Claims Tribunal shall also consider law laid down by the Supreme Court, this Court and other High Courts in Shivaji Dayanu Patil and another Vs. Smt. Vatschala Uttam More, Smt. Rita Devi and Others Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Another, , Samir Chanda Vs. Managing Director, Assam State TPT. Corpn., , Smt. Kaushnuma Begum and Others Vs. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Others, , National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shiv Dutt Sharma, (J&K), DTC v. Meena Kumari, III (2010) ACC 72 and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mosina, MAC.APP.No.73/2006 decided on 25th November, 2011 to determine whether the death occurred due to the accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle.

The parties are directed to appear before the Claims Tribunal on 14th May, 2012. LCR be returned back forthwith.