Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.17 seconds)

Deepal Girishbhai Soni And Ors vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Baroda on 18 March, 2004

6. The issue whether the claim petition filed under Section 163-A is maintainable if the annual income of the deceased is more than Rs.40,000/- per annum. This court has categorically opined that taking the interpretation of Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act, the clear intention of the legislation was to come to rescue of all those who, in the absence of any evidence, are not in a position to file a claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act. Where death of the victim or permanent disablement of victim was required to be proved by establishing the factum of negligence in favour of the offending vehicle resulting into causing the accident under Section 163-A, the requirement of proving the negligence has been dispensed with. Even otherwise, the issue before the Supreme Court in Deepal Girishbhai (Supra) was whether two petitions filed by the claimants simultaneously under Sections 166 and 163-A are maintainable. In para 51 of the aforesaid judgment, it is recorded that it does not contain any provision providing for set off against a higher compensation unlike Section 140. In terms of the said provision, a distinct and specified class of citizens, namely, persons whose income per annum is Rs.40,000/- or less is covered thereunder whereas Sections 140 and 166 cater to all sections of society.
Supreme Court of India Cites 27 - Cited by 749 - S B Sinha - Full Document
1