NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD Vs. SAKSHI BHUTANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant New India Assurance Co. Ltd. impugns a judgment dated 28.3.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby a compensation of Rs. 12,75,960 was awarded in favour of the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 for the death of Rajesh Bhutani who died in a motor accident which occurred on 31.7.2008.

(2.) THERE is twin challenge to the award; it is urged that the Claims Tribunal erred in holding that the accident was caused on account of the rash and negligent driving of vehicle No. HR -47D -3785 by the Fourth Respondent which was a sine qua non for award of compensation in a Petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (the Act) and that the compensation awarded was excessive and exorbitant. Negligence:

(3.) IT is true that no eye -witness has been examined in this case. It has to be borne in mind that the Motor Vehicles Act does not envisage holding a trial for a Petition preferred under Section 166 of the Act. Under Section 168 of the Act, a Claims Tribunal is enjoined to hold an inquiry to determine compensation which must appear to it to be just. Strict rules of evidence are not applicable in an inquiry conducted by the Claims Tribunal. In State of Mysore v. S.S.Makapur, 1993 (2) SCR 943, the Supreme Court held that the Tribunals exercising quasi -judicial functions are not Courts and are not bound by strict rules of evidence. The relevant portion of the report in State of Mysore (supra) is extracted hereunder: