GAYTRI Vs. AMIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioners are aggrieved by an order dated 10.10.2011, whereby the Petitioners' application for converting a petition under Sections 166 and 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to one under Section 163-A of the Act, was dismissed on the ground that in the original claim petition the Petitioners claimed the deceased's income to be Rs. 9,000/- per month, which is now claimed to be Rs. 40,000/- per annum. The Claims Tribunal opined that in the absence of any reason for this reduction, the same cannot be accepted. Consequently, it dismissed the application.

(2.) It may be mentioned that while claiming compensation a person having more income than Rs. 40,000/- can avail Section 163-A of the Act by restricting his income to Rs. 40,000/- per annum. Otherwise also, falsity or truthness of the averments made is not to be seen at the time of allowing the amendment or conversion of a petition from under Section 166 of the Act to the one under Section 163-A of the Act.

(3.) The question of conversion of a Petition under Section 163-A of the Act into one under Section 166 of the Act came up before the Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) in New India Assurance Company Limited v. Ashabai Kalyan Kothi & Ors., 2009 ACJ 163, where it was held as under:-