RANI Vs. SHYAMSUNDER MANDHANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants-claimants in OP.No.127 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Adilabad (for short the Tribunal), are no other than the wife and four children, including one major daughter, preferred the appeal against the dismissal of the claim of Rs.4,00,000/- under Sections 166 and 163A of Motor Vehicle Act, mainly on the ground from para 8 of the award, that it is not stated in the claim petition as to whether the petitioners made claim for compensation before the Workmens Compensation Tribunal under W.C.Act as required, though they can claim either before the W.C. Tribunal under WC Act or before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal under M.V.Act and thereby the claim is not maintainable for no such say by giving liberty to move the Tribunal under W.C.Act.

(2.) The contentions in the grounds of appeal in nutshell are that the Tribunal erred in dismissing the claim contrary to law instead of awarding compensation under Section 163A of M.V.Act for which there is no need of any proof of rash or negligent act but for vehicle in use and the accidental death of the deceased there under and the Tribunal also failed to consider that the claimants can make claim either under M.V. Act or under W.C.Act, hence to set aside the dismissal order of Tribunal and to allow the claim by allowing the appeal.

(3.) At the hearing, the learned counsel reiterated the said contentions in saying the Tribunal ought to have considered the claim under W.C. Act in fixing the liability of the insurer in view of Section 167 of M.V.Act as per the settled expressions of the Apex Court. The 1st respondent-owner failed to contend despite having served and remained exparte before the Tribunal. The 2nd respondent-insurer represented by counsel contended that the award of the Tribunal is just in dismissing the claim that too for no mention of the factum of no claim preferred under W.C.Act that is required to invoke Section 167 of M.V.Act for the option either to approach the Tribunal under W.C.Act or the Tribunal under M.V.Act and when given liberty to approach the Tribunal W.C.Act, for this Court while sitting in appeal there is nothing to interfere and hence to dismiss the appeal. Perused the material on record. The parties hereinafter are referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience in the appeal.