Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs Raval Rupsibhai Pasabhai-Deceased & 5 on 4 March, 2014
12. Thus, the view taken by the Punjab and Haryana
High Court and the Delhi High Court in the above referred
decisions is in line with the view taken by this court in the case
of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation v. Union of
India (supra). On a conspectus of the above decisions, it is
apparent that under the provisions of section 168 of the Act,
Page 18 of 24
C/FA/3434/2013 JUDGMENT
the jurisdiction of the Tribunal extends to awarding
compensation against all or some of the tortfeasors or even
one. However, where the Tribunal finds that two or more
vehicles are involved in the accident and their drivers are
found negligent, it is under a statutory mandate to specify and
apportion the amount proportionate to the responsibility of the
owner and the driver of one vehicle and that of the other. The
Tribunal while doing so only specifies the inter se liability of
the owners/drivers of the vehicles found negligent in causing
the accident and it does not affect the right of the claimant
because the claimant is entitled in law to recover the entire
compensation amount from all or any one of the tortfeasors
jointly and severally. By doing so, the Tribunal completes
adjudication between the concerned parties so that future
litigation inter se the joint tortfeasors for contribution can be
avoided. This is necessary because where both the
owners/insurance companies contribute towards satisfaction of
the award to the extent of their liability, there is no problem.
The problem arises when the entire awarded amount is
recovered by the claimant from the owner/insurance company
of one of the vehicles. In such an eventuality, which would
arise mostly where one of the vehicles is insured and the other
is not insured, in which case, there is every likelihood that the
entire awarded amount may be recovered by the claimant
from insurance company of the insured vehicle. In such an
eventuality, the party which satisfies the award should not be
left remediless and should be in a position to recover the
amount paid by it to the extent of the liability of the
owner/driver of the other vehicle. Examining the matter from
another angle, if the insurance company of the insured vehicle,
under the very same award, is not permitted to recover the
Page 19 of 24
C/FA/3434/2013 JUDGMENT
amount paid by it to the extent of the liability of the other
vehicle it would amount to putting premium on not getting
one's vehicle insured, inasmuch as the insurance company of
the insured vehicle, in most cases, would alone have to satisfy
the award and may not be in a position to recover the amount
in proportion to the liability of the other vehicle from its owner,
as a consequence whereof the owner of the uninsured vehicle
goes scot free. Such could not have been the intention of the
legislature.