Remanded

Toga Ram v. Purkha Ram

Rajasthan HC14 Aug 2024CMA/2376/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed the appeal, quashing the MACT award dismissed the claim under Section 166 due to income limits. The court remanded the matter to the MACT to decide afresh after converting the claim to Section 163-A, permitting life insurance benefits for the deceased.

What did the court decide?

Appellants permitted to convert claim petitions to Section 163-A; matter remanded to MACT to decide afresh within six months.

Toga Ram Vs Purkha Ram — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2376/2019

¶3

Toga Ram S/o Shri Chanana Ram, Aged About 54 Years, R/o Village Rupsi, Tehsil And District Jaisalmer (Raj.)

¶4

Smt. Sundar W/o Toga Ram, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Village Rupsi, Tehsil And District Jaisalmer (Raj.)

¶5

----Appellants

¶6

Versus

¶7

Purkha Ram S/o Shri Tara Ram, R/o Village Rupsi, Tehsil And District Jaisalmer (Raj.) (Registered Owner Of Offending Vehicle Bolero Slx No. Rj-15-Ua-1300)

¶8

Manager, The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Third Floor, Anand Bhawan, Sansar Chand Road, Jaipur (Raj.) (Insurance Comapny Of Offending Vehicle Bolero Slx No. Rj-15-Ua-1300)

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Appellant(s) : Mr. K.L. Chauhan

¶11

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

¶12

Order

¶13

14/08/2024

¶14

The instant appeal has been preferred by the claimants/appellants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (‘the Act of 1988’) challenging the validity of judgment/award dated 23.04.2019 passed by the learned MACT, Jaisalmer (Judge, Family Court, Jaisalmer) in MACT Case No.54/2017 (Toga Ram & Anr. Vs. Purkha Ram & Anr.) whereby the learned Tribunal dismissed the claim petition of the claimants/ appellants.

¶15

Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants, at the outset, makes a limited prayer that the appellants may be permitted to

¶16

[CMA-2376/2019]

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

file an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (‘the Act of 1988’). He further submits that an application under Section 163-A of the Act of 1988 was preferred by the appellant, however, the same came to be dismissed on the ground that the annual income of the deceased is more than Rs.40,000/-. He, thus, urges to remand this matter to the learned MACT, Jaisalmer (Judge, Family Court, Jaisalmer) while treating the claim under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 to a petition under Section 163-A of the Act of 1988 and decide the same by considering the income of the deceased.

¶19

In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the applicants/claimants places reliance upon the Full Bench Judgment dated 10.04.2001 passed by the High Court of Karnataka in the case of Guruanna Vedi & Anr. Vs. General Manager, Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation & Anr. reported in AIR 2001 Karnataka 275 wherein the High Court of Karnataka has held that a claimant can amend the claim petition filed under Section 166 to a petition under Section 163-A of the Act of 1988, at any stage of the proceedings and further, the court concerned shall pass an order on that application in accordance with law. He also places reliance upon the order dated 29.08.2023 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in the case of

¶20

Govindbhai Chhaganbhai Bhil (Rana) Vs. Dilawarkhan Sahebkhan Baloch : R/First Appeal No.845/2023 , while submitting that it is permissible to exercise the option out of two proceedings under Section 163-A and 166 of the Act of 1988 to convert the claim petition under any of the section either during pendency of the proceedings before the Tribunal or at an Appellate

¶21

[CMA-2376/2019]

¶22

(3 of 3)

¶23

stage. He, thus, implores the Court to allow the applications (Nos.01/2024) and remand these matters to the learned MACT, Sirohi while treating the claim under Section 163-A of the Act of 1988.

¶24

In view of the submissions made hereinabove and applying the ratio of Full Bench judgment passed by the High Court of Karnataka in case of Guruanna Vedi (supra) and the order passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in the case of Govindbhai (supra) , this Court finds considerable force in the arguments advanced by the appellants/claimants’ counsel.

¶25

Thus, the award dated 23.04.2019 passed by the learned MACT, Jaisalmer (Judge, Family Court, Jaisalmer) in MACT Case No.54/2017 (Toga Ram & Anr. Vs. Purkha Ram & Anr.), is quashed and set aside. The applicants are permitted to convert the claim petitions into one under Section 163-A of the Act of 1988.

¶26

Consequently, the instant appeal filed by the applicants/claimants is disposed of. The matter is remanded to the learned MACT, Jaisalmer (Judge, Family Court, Jaisalmer) to decide the same afresh in an expeditious manner, preferably within a period of ‘six months’ from the date of passing of this order while treating the same as under Section 163-A of the Act of 1988 while affording both the parties opportunity of hearing.

¶27

A copy of this order be placed in each file.

¶28

Record be returned to the Tribunal forthwith.

¶29

(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J

¶30

41-Devesh/-

Toga Ram v. Purkha Ram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Toga Ram v. Purkha Ram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Pushplata and Ors.

Ranveer Singh Vs Reliance General Insurance Company Limited

Smt. Sosar Kanwar and Ors. Vs Amar Singh and Anr.

National Highway Authority of India Vs Meena

Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Sh. Dharam Pal

M/S Guru Nanak Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India