Motor Vechile Acciedent Claim

Motor Vechile Acciedent Claim

In 1988 a new Motor Vehicle Act have been introduced and in new Motor Vehicle Act’s Chapter 10 provides for interim award. Chapter 11 provides for insurance of motor vehicle against third party risk and Chapter 12 provides for the constitution of Claims Tribunal and adjudication of claim and related matters. This law is still in an era of serious changes. Supreme Court has number of times held that this is a welfare legislation and the interpretation of provision of law is required to be made so as to help the victim. In this process Supreme Court has passed various judgments in recent past, which have restricted the statutory defenses of the Insurance Company to a greater extent as law relating to burden of proof have been totally changed. Limited defenses as to not holding valid driving license, use of vehicle for hire and reward, use of transport vehicle for the purpose not allowed by permit are required to be proved in so stringent manner that insurer are not getting advantage of these defenses.

Life cannot be valued; similarly no human being can be put into any monetary value of his limb or of any other human being. The courts can only grant compensation for the pecuniary and monetary loss caused and some other expenses, but no court can even attempt to grant compensation for loss of life or limb. Mainly pecuniary loss has to be assessed. Nominal damages for funeral expenses are awarded and on loss of consortium. Long expectation of life is connected with earning capacity. In its very nature whenever a tribunal or a court is required to fix the amount of compensation in cases of accidents it involves some guess work, some hypothetical consideration, some amount of sympathy linked with the nature of the disability caused.


The work of the tribunal has been made somewhat easy by the recent judgment of the apex court in Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, wherein the following factors have to be considered by the Tribunal while awarding compensation.

Step 1.The income of the deceased per annum should be ascertained. Out of the said income a deduction is to be made with regard to the amount which the deceased would have spent on him by way of personal and living expenses. The balance which is to be considered to be the contribution to the dependent family constitutes the multiplicant.

Step 2 Having regard to the age of deceased and active career, the multiplication method should be selected

Application for compensation.—

(1) An application for compensation arising out of an accident of the nature specified in sub-section (1) of section 165 may be made—
(a) by the person who has sustained the injury; or
(b) by the owner of the property; or
(c) where death has resulted from the accident, by all or any of the legal representatives of the deceased; or
(d) by any agent duly authorised by the person injured or all or any of the legal representatives of the deceased, as the case may be: Provided that where all the legal representatives of the deceased have not joined in any such application for compensation, the application shall be made on behalf of or for the benefit of all the legal representatives of the deceased and the legal representatives who have not so joined, shall be impleaded as respondents to the application. 1[(2) Every application under sub-section (1) shall be made, at the option of the claimant, either to the Claims Tribunal having jurisdiction over the area in which the accident occurred, or to the Claims Tribunal within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the claimant resides or carries on business or within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the defendant resides, and shall be in such form and contain such particulars as may be prescribed: Provided that where no claim for compensation under section 140 is made in such application, the application shall contain a separate statement to that effect immediately before the signature of the applicant.] [(4) The Claims Tribunal shall treat any report of accidents forwarded to it under sub-section (6) of section 158 as an application for compensation under this Act
order VII of CPC 
13. Where rejection of plaint does not preclude presentation of fresh plaint.- The rejection of the plaint on any of the grounds hereinbefore mentioned shall not of its own force preclude the plaintiff from presenting a fresh plaint in respect of the same cause of action.

User Comments


C2RMTo Know More

Something Awesome Is In The Work









Sign-up and we will notify you of our launch.
We’ll also give some discount for your effort :)

* We won’t use your email for spam, just to notify you of our launch.

SAARTHTo Know More

Launching Soon : SAARTH, your complete client, case, practise & document management SAAS application with direct client chat feature.

If you want to know more give us a Call at :+91 98109 29455 or Mail