Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(4) A claim for compensation under Sub-section (1) shall not be defeated by reason of any wrongful act, neglect or default of the person in respect of whose death or permanent disablement the claim has been made nor shall the quantum of compensation recoverable in respect of such death or permanent disablement be reduced on the basis of the share of such person in the responsibility for such death or permanent disablement.

92-B. Provisions as to other right to claim compensation for death or permanent disablement.-

(1) The right to claim compensation under Section 92-A in respect of death or permanent disablement of any person shall be in addition to any other right (hereafter in this section referred to as the right on the principle of fault) to claim compensation in respect thereof under any other provision of this Act or of any other law for the time being in force.
(2) A claim for compensation under Section 92-A in respect of death or permanent disablement of any person shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible and where compensation is claimed in respect of such death or permanent disablement under Section 92-A and also in pursuance of any right on the principle of fault, the claim for compensation under Section 92-A shall be disposed of as aforesaid in the first place.

13. It may be noted that under Section 92-A, the liability is in case of death or permanent disability. But under Section 93(ba), the liability was defined in relation to the death or bodily injury of any person includes the liability in respect thereof under Section 92-A The bodily injury may result in permanent disability as contemplated under Section 92-C and it also includes other types of injuries. The liability under Section 92-A does not arise in regard to other bodily injuries. So in that context it has to be stated that for the purpose of Section 92-A, the bodily injury referred to in Section 93(ba) is only permanent disablement as defined under Section 92-C. At best it can be stated that it was not happily worded.

15. But in Oriental Fire & General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Beasa Devi 1985 ACJ 1 (P&H) and in Oriental Fire & General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Shantabai S. Dhume 1987 ACJ 198 (Bombay), it was held that if for any reason the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation under the terms of the insurance, it will be always open to it to get from the owner refund of the money paid under Section 92-A to the victim or to his family. But with due respect I disagree. The no fault liability is created for the first time under Section 92-A Such a liability does not exist as per the Law of Torts. As already observed this no fault liability is distinct and different from the fault liability available under the Law of Torts. The owner is made liable for no fault liability for the use of his vehicle. If that vehicle is not used, there could not be any accident because of that vehicle and there could not be any death or permanent disablement either to pedestrians and the question of passengers getting into that vehicle does not arise. As already observed, the owner of the vehicle is liable for no fault liability even in cases where the driver of the vehicle was not at fault and also in cases where the accident was solely due to the fault of the injured or the deceased. A reading of Section 92-A suggests that no defence is available to the owner of the vehicle if it is established that his vehicle was involved in the accident resulting in death or permanent disability as contemplated under Section 92-C. Thus even if a person enters into the lorry without heeding to the protests of the driver, the owner of the vehicle is liable if such person dies because of the injuries sustained in that accident or if they result in permanent disablement. Section 93(ba) reads that the liability in regard to Chapter VIII includes the liability under Section 92-A This court held in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Chotinabee 1986 ACJ 120 (AP), that insurer is also liable for no fault liability.