New plea raised before High Court in writ petition under Art. 227 of Constitution of India - Issue as to maintainability of
instant claim petition under MV Act neither pleaded by opposite party nor any evidence led by it in relation to that issue
during trial - That apart, opposite party not pressed the said issue framed by trial court - On such facts, held, High Court
erred in adjudicating upon the said issue raised for the first time in writ petition under Art. 227 of Constitution of India,
Montford Bros. of St. Gabriel v. United India Insurance, (2014) 3 SCC 394
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Ss. 166, 168 and 173 - Death in motor accident - Persons competent to claim compensation under S. 166 MV Act in
case of - Right of legal representatives of deceased - Scope - Corporate body or Collective entity when may claim
compensation as legal representative - Challenge to said right at subsequent stage in higher court (through writ petition) -
Limitations on - Held, in case of death of a person in motor accident, a person claiming to be a legal representative of
deceased has locus to file claim under S. 166 MV Act, either directly or through any agent, subject to result of
dispute/objection raised by opposite party on said issue - Further, the proceeding before Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
being summary in nature, unless there is evidence before Claims Tribunal in support of such pleading that the claimant is
not a legal representative and therefore the claim petition is liable to be dismissed as not maintainable, no such plea can
be raised at a subsequent stage and that too through a writ petition - In present case, one AC, a Roman Catholic, joined
Appellant 1 Charitable Society renouncing his family pursuant to rules of that Society - After death of AC in a motor
accident, Appellant 1 Society claiming compensation in respect thereof under MV Act through its duly authorised agent
Appellant 2 - Contention raised before High Court by Insurance Company that in absence of any family or heir of AC,
Appellant 1 Society could not file said claim petition for want of locus standi - Issue regarding maintainability of claim
petition neither pleaded by Insurance Company nor any evidence led by it in respect of that issue - That apart, said
issue, though framed by Accidents Claims Tribunal, was not pressed by opposite parties during trial - Despite said fact,
Tribunal answering said issue in favour of appellant claimants after relying upon various judgments of Foreign as well as
Indian Courts - In these circumstances, impugned order of High Court setting aside Tribunal's award [granting
compensation of Rs 2,52,000 to appellants] on ground that appellants were not competent to claim compensation under
MV Act, held, not tenable and therefore set aside - Order of Tribunal restored,
Practice and Procedure
Pleadings/New Plea/Additional Plea/Alternative Plea
New plea raised before High Court in writ petition under Art. 227 of Constitution of India - Issue as to maintainability of
instant claim petition under MV Act neither pleaded by opposite party nor any evidence led by it in relation to that issue
during trial - That apart, opposite party not pressed the said issue framed by trial court - On such facts, held, High Court
erred in adjudicating upon the said issue raised for the first time in writ petition under Art. 227 of Constitution of India,
Family and Personal Laws
Legal representatives and Heirs
Who are - Corporate body or Collective entity - When,
No comments:
Post a Comment