Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 80 (CHH)

Gajaropan Yadav v. T. S. Singhdeo

2002-09-09

FAKHRUDDIN

body2002
ORDER Fakhruddin, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel. 2. The applicant have preferred this revision against the award dated 3-1-2002 passed by the 1st Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambikapur, whereby the amount awarded towards no fault liability has been directed to been deposited in the Nationalized Bank in Fixed Deposit for three years. 3. Deceased Madhusudhan died on 3-4-2000 on account of an accident while he was driving the vehicle/Tractor bearing registration No. CP.L. 9297. 4. Learned Counsel for the applicants submitted that the claimants are legal heirs of the deceased and they are in need of the amount and that the amount be disbursed to them. He relied on a decision of this Court in the case of Smt. Dhano Devi vs. Hulas Ram and Anr., reported in 2002(4) M.P.H.T. 12 (CG) = 2002(1) C.G.LJ. 311. 5. Rule 228 of the M.P. Motor Vehicles Act relates to disbursement of compensation. It is relevant and quoted below :-- "228. Procedure of disbursement of compensation under Section 140.-- Legal heirs in case of death.-- Where the Claims Tribunal feels that the disbursement of actual amount due to the claimant is likely to take time because of the identification and the fixation of legal heirs of the deceased, the Claims Tribunal may call for the amount of compensation awarded, to be deposited with the Claims Tribunal and then proceed with the identification of the legal heirs for deciding the payment of compensation to each of the legal heir." 6. This Court in the case of Smt. Dhano Devi (supra) has dealt with the matter regarding payment of amount towards no fault liability. Para 3 of the aforesaid order is relevant and quoted below :-- "3. Provisions of Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act are benevolent. A reading of Section 140 of the Act shows that the amount has to be immediately paid to the claimant. The intention of the legislators is very clear that the legal heirs of the deceased, who died in accident must be paid the amount. Once it is proved that the claimant is legal heir of the deceased, the amount has to be given to her. The direction of the Tribunal frustrates the very object and purpose of Section 140 of the Act and as such it is not sustainable. Once it is proved that the claimant is legal heir of the deceased, the amount has to be given to her. The direction of the Tribunal frustrates the very object and purpose of Section 140 of the Act and as such it is not sustainable. The Claims Tribunal should always keep in mind that the Motor Vehicles Act is a beneficial legislation and provisions of Section 140 of the Act have been introduced in the year 1988 on the ground of no fault liability and immediate relief. Such order being passed deprives the claimant from his/her right. It is likely that on the one hand no fault liability is directed to be given and on the other, it is taken away by the Tribunal. It defeats the purpose of the enactment of the legislation. It also cause more sufferings. In spite of the orders passed by the High Court and the position being clear, such directions are being given regarding interim relief. Due care and caution has to be taken and proper orders should be passed keeping in view the object enshrined so as to promote justice." 7. The accident occurred on 3-4-2000 and claim was field on 23-6-2000 and the award could be passed on 3-1-2002 and the award could be passed on 3-1-2002 and the amount has been directed to be deposited in fixed deposit. 8. Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that even in respect of no fault claim under Section 140 of the Act, the Tribunals are not disbursing the amount and claimants are getting nothing and the entire amount is directed to be deposited. The Claims Tribunals are expected to disburse the amount to the claimants. This Court has repeatedly stressed that the payment for no fault liability under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act has to be disbursed as per the provisions of law and as per Rule 228 of the Act. No such practice should be developed contrary to the rules. It should not be the practice but it should be the rules which have to be followed. The Bar also owes duty to apprise the presiding officers of the Tribunals and proper assistance should be rendered. 9. In view of the discussions made hereinabove, the revision is allowed. The amount be disbursed to the claimants by Demand Draft/Banker's cheque forthwith. 10. Certified photocopy as per rules. 11. The Bar also owes duty to apprise the presiding officers of the Tribunals and proper assistance should be rendered. 9. In view of the discussions made hereinabove, the revision is allowed. The amount be disbursed to the claimants by Demand Draft/Banker's cheque forthwith. 10. Certified photocopy as per rules. 11. Copy of this order be forwarded to the District Judge Tribunal concerned.