Skip to content


Smt. Koili Bahalia Vs. Bijay Kumar Das and anr. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation
SubjectMotor Vehicles
CourtOrissa High Court
Decided On
Case NumberMiscellaneous Appeal Nos. 750 and 781 of 1996
Judge
Reported in1998(II)OLR251
ActsMotor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections 140
AppellantSmt. Koili Bahalia
RespondentBijay Kumar Das and anr.
Appellant AdvocateK.N. Sinha, N.K. Guru and Tapaswini Sinha
Respondent AdvocateA.S. Naidu, P.K. Mohapatra, D. Moharana, A.S. Nandy and S.P. Swain
Excerpt:
- labour & services pay scale:[tarun chatterjee & r.m. lodha,jj] fixation - orissa service code (1939), rule 74(b) promotion - government servant, by virtue of rule 74(b), gets higher pay than what he was getting immediately before his promotion - circular dated 19.3.1983 modifying earlier circular dated 18.6.1982 resulting in reduction of pay of employee on promotion held, it is not legal. statutory rules cannot be altered or amended by such executive orders or circulars or instructions nor can they replace statutory rules. - in the present case on going through the post mortem report as well as the inquest report, prima facie, it appears that the death is due to the injuries sustained in a motor accident......claims tribunal rejected the applications of the claimant-appellant under section 140 of the motor vehicles act, 1988, for payment of compensation under no-fault liability, as envisaged in section 140 of the act. the tribunal has observed that the names of the deceased had not been indicated in the fir and the final form and as such, it was difficult on the part of the tribunal to find out as to whether the deceased under both the cases had died on account of the accident in question.3. after having heard the learned counsels for both parties and perused the lower court records in both the cases, i am of the view that the orders of the tribunal cannot be sustained. in a proceeding under section 140 of the motor vehicles act, the tribunal is required to find out prima facie.....
Judgment:

P.K. Misra, J.

1. Since these two appeals are directed against two similar orders, both of them are taken up together and are disposed of by this common judgment.

2. In both the matters, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal rejected the applications of the claimant-appellant under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for payment of compensation under no-fault liability, as envisaged in Section 140 of the Act. The Tribunal has observed that the names of the deceased had not been indicated in the FIR and the Final Form and as such, it was difficult on the part of the Tribunal to find out as to whether the deceased under both the cases had died on account of the accident in question.

3. After having heard the learned counsels for both parties and perused the lower Court records in both the cases, I am of the view that the orders of the Tribunal cannot be sustained. In a proceeding under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the Tribunal is required to find out prima facie regarding an accident and the resultant death. Such a finding must necessarily be a finding on the materials on record and as such, the Tribunal was required to discuss in detail about the various materials available on record. In the present case on going through the post mortem report as well as the inquest report, prima facie, it appears that the death is due to the injuries sustained in a motor accident. The FIR itself indicates about the accident, and a reference has also been made to the connected P.S. Case number. Therefore, prima facie, there is no doubt that the death occurred on account of the accident. As such, keeping in view the intention of the legislature, it is a fit case where a sum of Rs. 50,000/- is payable to the claimant-appellant under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act. This direction regarding payment is to be complied with by the Insurance Company as prima facie, it appears that the vehicle in question had been insured with the Insurance Company. It is made clear that in case it is established that death was not on account of the accident, the amount paid to the claimant-appellant shall be recoverable.

4. Subject to the aforesaid direction, both the appeals are disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //