V M RAJENDRAN Vs. VEPATI RANI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In a motor accident claim case, the claimants chose to make the owner and insurer of only one of the three vehicles involved in a composite accident as party respondents. The insurer of the said vehicle filed an interlocutory application in I.A.No.1153 of 2015 to implead the owner of a Tata Indica car bearing registration No.AP-09-X-7418, whose insurance particulars are not available and the owner and insurer of a mini goods van bearing registration No.AP-29-TB-7635 as party respondents in the M.C.O.P.No.1 of 2014 so as to enable the Tribunal to find out, who was at fault and in case of composite negligence, how the liability is to be apportioned among the owners of the three vehicles involved in the accident.

(2.) It is not a claim made under Section 163(A) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, in which the claimant shall not be required to either plead or prove any fault on the part of the respondent. Had the petition been filed under the said provision to enforce the no fault liability, the owner or insurer of one of the vehicles alone, who are proceeded against, may not have a right of seeking impleadment of the owners and insurers of the other two vehicles. On the other hand, since the claim was made under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the question of negligence has got to be gone in the event of the owner and the insurer of one of the vehicles who alone are made respondents in the M.C.O.P., they shall be entitled to move a petition for impleadment of owners and insurers of the other two vehicles, so that, a finding regarding the person, who is responsible for the accident, could be rendered and in case, the Tribunal comes to the conclusion that it is a composite negligence of all the vehicles or two out of three vehicles that involved in the accident, it will pave the way for apportionment of the liability among the owners of the said vehicles to be borne by the respective insurance companies.

(3.) In any event, the claimants are not going to be affected, as there won't be any problem in getting the compensation for which the claimant would be entitled. In the event of the Tribunal passing an award holding the owners and insurers of the vehicles involved in the accident jointly and severally liable, the claimant shall be entitled to enforce the award as against the owner and insurer of one of the vehicles, leaving the owner or the insurer of the said vehicle to seek rateable contribution from the owners and insurer of the other vehicles according to the award. The learned Tribunal, without considering the above said aspects, seems to have dismissed the petition by the impugned order. Hence, the present revision came to be filed challenging the impugned order of the Tribunal under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.