Section 163A MV Act: Claimant Not Required To Establish Negligence Of Offending Vehicle- Calcutta HC In Road Accident Case
A Calcutta High Court Bench of Justice Bivas Pattanayak has directed the West Bengal State Transport Corporation (WBSTC) to pay around Rs. 2,00,000 compensation to the family of a minor girl who was killed by a WBSTC bus in a road accident.
In that context, it was observed that "in a proceeding under Section 163A of the Act, claimant shall not be required to plead or establish that the death or permanent disablement in respect of which the claim has been made was due to any wrongful act or neglect or default of the owner of the vehicle or vehicles concerned or of any other person."
Counsel Jayanta Kr. Mandal appeared for the appellants. Counsel Sanjay Paul and Justice Jaita Ghosh appeared for the respondent.
In this case, an appeal was preferred against an order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, granting compensation of only Rs.15,000/- in favour of the claimant, together with interest under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Tribunal had decided on the aspect of negligence.
The parents of the victim contended that a strict interpretation of Section 163A was required and that the negligence of the offending vehicle was immaterial in the case. The provision deals with determining compensation in cases of death or permanent disablement.
The High Court set aside the order of the Tribunal, while observing that "it is found from the impugned judgment that the learned Tribunal has framed issue that whether the victim died in the motor accident due to rash and negligent act of the driver of the offending vehicle and has also proceeded to decide such issue holding the negligence of the driver. The finding of the learned Tribunal with regard to the aspect of negligence of the driver is not in consonance with the provisions envisaged under Section 163A of the Act and therefore, such finding of the learned Tribunal with regard negligence of the driver in the accident in a proceeding under Section 163A of the Act is liable to be set aside."
Further, the Court stated that when determining the income of a minor victim for compensation purposes under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, the calculation should follow the structured formula outlined in the Second Schedule of the Act. According to the Second Schedule, non-earning individuals are assigned a notional income of Rs. 15,000 per year.
Additionally, for victims of road accidents below the age of 15, the court established a multiplier of 20. Regarding deductions, the court referred to the Supreme Court's ruling in Deepal Girishbhai Soni v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., which emphasized that the calculation of compensation under Section 163A should adhere to the structured formula outlined in the Second Schedule. As per this formula, a deduction of 1/3rd of the notional income should be considered for personal and living expenses, as specified in the Second Schedule.
The Court modified the compensation order accordingly.
Cause Title: Sri Santosh Saha and Anr v. The Managing Director, Calcutta State Transport Corporation
Click here to read/download the Judgment
