Sikkim High Court

The Branch Manager, The New India ... vs Minor Keonsel Namgyal Bhutia And Ano on 24 April, 2025

Author: Meenakshi Madan Rai

Bench: Meenakshi Madan Rai

                THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK
                                     (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)
                                      DATED : 24th April, 2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    SINGLE BENCH : THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    MAC App. No. 21 of 2024
                  Appellant                :        The Branch Manager,
                                                    The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
                                                                 versus
                  Respondents              :        Minor Keonsel Namgyal Bhutia and Another

         Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Appearance
                  Mr. Dipayan Roy, Advocate for the Appellant.
                  Mr. K. B. Chettri, Advocate for the Respondent No.1
                  Mr. Rachhita Rai, Advocate for the Respondent No.2.
          ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                   JUDGMENT (ORAL)

Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.

1. The Appellant assails the Judgment and Award, both

dated 26-06-2024, of the Learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,

Gangtok, Sikkim (hereinafter, the "MACT"), in MACT Case No.25 of

2023 (Minor Keonsel Namgyal Bhutia vs. Shri Ranjeet Subba and

Another), whereby the Appellant was directed to pay ₹ 5,00,000/-

(Rupees five lakhs) only, with interest @ 10% per annum, in a

Claim Petition filed by the Claimant, under Section 164 of the Motor

Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter, the "MV Act"), on grounds of

"injury" sustained by the minor victim.

(i) Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the

Learned MACT erred in granting compensation of ₹ 5,00,000/-

(Rupees five lakhs) only, under Section 164(1) of the MV Act instead

of ₹ 2,50,000/- (Rupees two lakhs and fifty thousand) only, as

envisaged by the provision, since the victim of the accident only

suffered a fracture in his left leg and it was not a case of fatality.

The impugned Judgment may be rectified, requiring the Appellant to

The Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Minor Keonsel Namgyal Bhutia and Another

compensate the Claimant for a sum of ₹ 2,50,000/- (Rupees two

lakhs and fifty thousand) only, as legally provided.

2. Learned Counsel for the Claimant/Respondent No.1

fairly concedes that the Claim Petition was filed under Section 164 of

the MV Act and the compensation sought was ₹ 4,87,377/- (Rupees

four lakhs, eighty seven thousand, three hundred and seventy

seven) only, however in view of the statutory provision, the

Claimant/Respondent No.1 ought to have been compensated with ₹

2,50,000/- (Rupees two lakhs and fifty thousand) only, by the

Learned MACT.

3. Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 had no

specific submissions to advance.

4. Heard Learned Counsel for the parties. The facts briefly

narrated are that on 08-01-2023, at around 09.00 a.m., the minor

Keonsel Namgyal Bhutia, aged about seven years, (represented by

his father before the Learned MACT,) was standing alongside the

road with several other devotees, waiting for a religious guru. The

driver of the offending vehicle (Hyundai i-10) drove the vehicle into

the waiting crowd, rashly and negligently as a result of which the

minor suffered a fracture in his left leg. Admittedly, the parents of

the Claimant incurred a sum of ₹ 57,377.29/- (Rupees fifty seven

thousand, three hundred, seventy seven and twenty nine paisa)

only, in his medical treatment, hence the Claim Petition.

5. The Learned MACT in the impugned Judgment has

observed inter alia as follows;

"19. It is relevant to note that after the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019 came into force, the old Chapter XI has been replaced with a new one. The provision of Section 164 (sic., Section 163A) has now been replaced with Section 164, which provides at sub-section (1) that notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force or instrument having the force of law,

The Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Minor Keonsel Namgyal Bhutia and Another

the owner of the motor vehicle or the authorized insurer shall be liable to pay in the case of death or grievous hurt due to any accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, a compensation, of a sum of five lakh rupees in case of death or of two and a half lakh rupees in case of grievous hurt to the legal heirs or the victim, as the case may be.

20. Though the claim is of ₹ 4,87,377 the petitioner/claimant is entitled to compensation of ₹ five lakhs in view of Section ₹ 164(1) of the Act of 1988. Being a benevolent legislation, I have preferred to invoke the provision which is more favourable to the petitioner/claimant." (emphasis supplied)

6. Despite the provision of Section 164 of the MV Act

having been perused by the Learned MACT as seen supra, however

without considering the import of the provision, compensation of ₹

5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) only, was allowed to the minor

Claimant, on grounds that the MV Act is a benevolent legislation,

thereby reflecting lack of application of judicial mind. Indeed, there

is no doubt that the legislation is benevolent, nonetheless such

benevolence does not tantamount to empowering the Learned MACT

with powers beyond the prescription of the statute. In the instant

case Section 164 of the MV Act categorically provides as follows;

"164. Payment of compensation in case of death or grevious hurt, etc.--(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force or instrument having the force of law, the owner of the motor vehicle or the authorised insurer shall be liable to pay in the case of death or grievous hurt due to any accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, a compensation, of a sum of five lakh rupees in case of death or of two and a half lakh rupees in case of grievous hurt to the legal heirs or the victim, as the case may be.

(2) In any claim for compensation under sub-

section (1), the claimant shall not be required to plead or establish that the death or grievous hurt in respect of which the claim has been made was due to any wrongful act or neglect or default of the owner of the vehicle or of the vehicle concerned or of any other person.

(3) Where, in respect of death or grievous hurt due to an accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, compensation has been paid under any other law for the time being in force, such amount of compensation shall be reduced from the amount of compensation payable under this section."

(emphasis supplied)

The Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Minor Keonsel Namgyal Bhutia and Another

7. Admittedly, the victim only suffered a fracture in his left

leg. The Learned MACT has therefore misdirected itself in Paragraph

20 of the impugned Judgment by granting compensation beyond the

statutory limit by a misinterpretation of the provision.

8. The impugned Judgment, dated 26-06-2024, granting

an Award of ₹ 5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) only, with interest @

10% per annum, from the date of filing of the Claim Petition i.e.,

05-07-2023, until full realization, is set aside and quashed.

9. In view of the provisions of Section 164(1) of the MV

Act, the Appellant-Insurance Company is directed to pay the