2011 INSC 0994
                        SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                        A. Sridhar

                        Vs.

                        United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

                        C.A.No.7823 of 2011

                        (G.S. Singhvi and H.L. Dattu JJ.)

                        13.09.2011

                        JUDGMENT

H.L. DATTU, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order passed by the High Court
of Madras, Chennai in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1779 of 2002, wherein, the
Court has allowed the appeal of the Insurance Company and reduced the
compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chennai (for short,
the Tribunal) from `1,60,000/- to `25,000/- under Section 140 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as, the Act).

3. In the Claim Petition filed under Section 166 of the Act, the appellant has stated
that on 14.01.1998, at about 7.10 PM, while he was riding the motor cycle along
with a pillion rider, the vehicle met with an accident due to oil spill on the road and
suffered grievous injuries. Since the vehicle is insured with the respondent-
Insurance Company, he is entitled for compensation of `6,00,000/- (Rupees Six
Lakhs) as general damages/compensation.

4. The Insurance Company has denied its liability. The Tribunal, while considering
the claim of the appellant, has come to the conclusion that the accident did not take
place due to rash and negligence driving of the claimant but due to oil spilling on
the road. Accordingly, the Tribunal has assessed the compensation payable to the
claimant at a sum of `1,60,000/- together with interest at 6% per annum under the
Insurance Policy.

Law Information Center              1                      SpotLaw
5. In the appeal filed by the Insurance Company, the High Court, has taken
exception to the order passed by the Tribunal and has come to the conclusion that
the Tribunal is not justified in allowing the claim petition moved under Section 166
of the Act and ought to have determined the compensation payable under Section
140 of the Act. Accordingly, the High Court has modified the award and has
reduced the compensation payable to `25,000/-.

6. Aggrieved by the Judgment and Order, the claimant is before us in this appeal.

7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. From
the evidence on record, the Tribunal holds that the appellant, while driving the
motor vehicle on the fateful day, met with an accident not because of the fault of
the owner of the vehicle or because of the fault of the other vehicle, but because of
the oil spill on the road. Therefore, the negligence can be attributable only on the
person who was driving the vehicle and hence, is not entitled to compensation
under the Insurance Policy. Therefore, the High Court was justified in invoking the
beneficial legislation and in directing the Insurance Company to pay limited
amount by way of compensation to the injured person of an accident arising out of
the use of a motor cycle on the basis of no fault liability, since the accident has
arisen out of use of motor vehicle and has resulted in grievous injuries to the
claimant.

8. In view of the above, we do not see any legal infirmity in the Judgment and
Order passed by the High Court. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. Costs are
made easy.

Law Information Center  2  SpotLaw