Accident case

RAJ SHARMA (Querist) 18 August 2012 This query is : Resolved
Sir, One of my friend visited to jaipur with his familly by car apx. one month ago, and due to otherparty's negligence accident happend, they are two women on twowheelar, they got injured and one of them casued measure injury,
my friend hospitalised to them and talking with familly of injured persons, and after 4-5 houres stay their, the opsite party say we are not file any case etc....
however after 4-5 day, they file FIR without showing that above said injured person on towwheelar and on compromise they demanded morethan Rs. 2.00 Lacs..

pl. suggest what action can taken by my friends, pl. not that insurance of car allready expired (so their is personaly liablity), car registered in the name of his wife (she is house wife and no other property she have), and his salary not more than 10000.00 per month.

pl. also suggest upto what extent liability to pay as compensession will be imposed by the court.

pl. suggest soon..becoz my friend in deprestion.

Follow Query

Report Abuse

Tarun Thakur (Expert) 19 August 2012
FIR is a criminal remedy. For getting Compensation the opposite party will file another case. Your friend will have to defend both cases in case compromise is not arrived at. Otherwise Rs 2 lakhs is a very big amount to purchase peace.
Regarding the determination of compensation amount, it will depend upon the injuries sustained by opposite party and medical bills produced by them.

Sudhir Kumar, Advocate (Expert) 19 August 2012
No it is not going to be a matter of two litigations only. There will be another criminal case against his wife also, in Jaipur as the car was on road, in Jaipur without insurance

Relevant provisions of MV Act are as under :-

S/177
Whoever contravenes any provision of this Act or of any rule, regulation or notification made thereunder shall, if no penalty is provided for the offence be punishable for the first offence with fine which may extend to one hundred rupees, and for any second or subsequent offence with fine which may extend to three hundred rupees.

S/146(1)

(1) No person shall use, except as a passenger, or cause or allow any other person to use, a motor vehicle in a public place, unless there is in force in relation to the use of the vehicle by that person or that other person, as the case may be, a policy of insurance complying with the requirements of this Chapter:

1[Provided that in the case of a vehicle carrying, or meant to carry, dangerous or hazardous goods, there shall also be a policy of insurance under the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 (6 of 1991).]

Explanation.-A person driving a motor vehicle merely as a paid employee, while there is in force in relation to the use of the vehicle no such policy as is required by this sub-section, shall not be deemed to act in contravention of the sub-section unless he knows or has reason to believe that there is no such policy in force.

S/206(1)

(1) Any police officer or other person authorised in this behalf by the State Government may, if he has reason to believe that any identification mark carried on a motor vehicle or any licence, permit, certificate of registration, certificate of insurance or other document produced to him by the driver or person in charge of a motor vehicle is a false document within the meaning of section 464 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860) seize the mark or document and call upon the driver or owner of the vehicle to account for his possession of or the presence in the vehicle of such mark or document.

S/163A

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force or instrument having the force of law, the owner of the motor vehicle or the authorised insurer shall be liable to pay in the case of death or permanent disablement due to accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, compensation, as indicated in the Second Schedule, to the legal heirs or the victim, as the case may be.

Explanation.-For the purposes of this sub-section, "permanent disability" shall have the same meaning and extent as in the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923).

(2) In any claim for compensation under sub-section (1), the 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.

(3) The Central Government may, keeping in view the cost of living by notification in the Official Gazette, from time to time amend the Second Schedule.

Once having agreed not to litigate there may be some reason for the "U" turn.

Taking car to other state whose insurance is expired. The car could have been impounded. Now if the car is called he may have to take the car to Jaipur in carriage as he is not supposed to drive uninsured car. He can negotiate fresh prospective insurance of car with the reluctant insurers.

It is for him to decide whether he can afford the face litigation or to pay compensation.