Criminal Trident Pack: IPC, CrPC and IEA by Sr. Adv. G.S Shukla and Adv. Raghav Arora
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

  • In Narayan v Mrs. Sangita and Anr, the Bombay High Court held that an employee is entitled to claim compensation both under section 140 of Motor Vehicles Act,1988 and under section 3 of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 as well.
  • The Court also held that the compensation awarded under Chapter X of the Motor Vehicles Act does not forfeit the employee's right to claim compensation u/s 3 of the 1923 Act.
  • In this case, a truck driver, an employee of the respondent and the owner of the truck, met with an accident. 
  • In this case, the appellant was a truck driver and an employee of the respondent no.1, the owner of the truck which was insured by respondent no.2. 
  • The appellant met with a vehicular accident which left him with a 35% physical disability.
  • Consequently, he served notice to both the respondents but to no avail.
  • Thereafter, he initiated proceedings for grant of compensation under section 140 of the MV Act, 1988 and under the WC Act 1923.
  • However, both the proceedings were rejected by the trial Court on the ground that as he has already received compensation u/s 140 of the MV Act, his cannot claim under a different provision.
  • The appellant filed an appeal and argued that the trial Court has erred in interpreting section 167 of the MV Act and that an application u/s 140 of MV Act falls outside the bar of section 169 of MV Act.
  • The appellant took reliance upon the case of Maroti Shrawan Manghate vs Smt. Rita Y. Sapra and Anr. 
  • The Court observed that section 140 comes under Chapter X of the MV Act which talks about liability without fault.
  • The Court further noted that section 140 talks about the liability to pay compensation even without fault in two cases; death and permanent disablement.
  • Moreover, the compensation granted under this Chapter is in addition to the compensation under 163 of the MV Act.
  • The Court agreed with the contentions raised by the appellant and held that the Trial Court erred in interpreting section 167 of the MV Act.
  • The Hon'ble Court also hd that if an employee receives compensation under Chapter X, he can still seek compensation under the WC Act.
  • Accordingly, the Court allowed the appeal.
     
"Loved reading this piece by Megha Nautiyal?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"




Tags :

  Views  45  Report



Comments
img
Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query