The Calcutta Excessive Court docket has held that the mere presence of an alcoholic odor within the abdomen of a deceased accident sufferer, as famous within the autopsy report, can’t be a floor to disclaim compensation to the authorized heirs beneath the Motor Autos Act, 1988.
Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury, whereas dismissing an enchantment filed by The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., affirmed an award of compensation granted to the household of a deceased motorcyclist who died in a highway accident involving a truck.
The enchantment arose from a judgment and award dated Could 22, 2024, handed by the Extra District Decide, third Court docket, Tamluk, in a declare petition beneath Part 166 of the Motor Autos Act. The Tribunal had awarded compensation of ₹11.41 lakh with 6% curiosity to the claimants—the mom and different dependants of the deceased Ganesh Das.
The accident occurred on December 27, 2020, when the bike ridden by the deceased collided with a truck alleged to have been pushed rashly and negligently. The deceased succumbed to accidents on the spot.
Difficult the award, the insurance coverage firm argued that the deceased was allegedly driving in a drunken situation, because the autopsy famous an alcoholic odor within the abdomen; the bike ridden by the deceased was not insured; and the compensation awarded was extreme.
The claimants, then again, filed cross-objections in search of enhancement of compensation, contending that the deceased earned ₹15,000 per thirty days, whereas the Tribunal assessed his earnings at ₹5,000 per thirty days.
Rejecting the insurer’s plea on intoxication, the Excessive Court docket noticed that beneath Part 185 of the Motor Autos Act, intoxication should be established by proving that the blood alcohol content material exceeded the prescribed restrict.
The Court docket held: “When the one who met with the accident is useless and alleged to be drunk, the heirs of the stated sufferer can’t be disadvantaged of compensation as a result of the stated particular person was the match particular person, if alive, to defend his case.”
The Court docket additional famous that within the absence of any breath analyser or blood alcohol take a look at, the mere odor of alcohol couldn’t conclusively set up drunken driving.
On the difficulty of non-insurance of the bike, the Court docket clarified that the declare was in opposition to the insurer of the offending car, and never in opposition to the insurer of the sufferer’s car. Since there was no contractual relationship between the appellant insurer and the proprietor of the bike, this defence was held to be irrelevant.
Relating to quantum of compensation, the Court docket upheld the Tribunal’s evaluation of earnings at ₹5,000 per thirty days, noting that the claimants did not show greater earnings by analyzing the employer or producing documentary proof.
Whereas dismissing the enchantment, the Court docket made an vital remark on public security, suggesting that insurance coverage corporations ought to inform transport authorities when automobiles proceed to ply on roads with out renewal of expired insurance coverage insurance policies, regardless of reminders.
Dismissing each the insurer’s enchantment and the claimants’ cross-objections, the Excessive Court docket affirmed the Tribunal’s award and held that there was no infirmity within the compensation granted.
The claimants had been permitted to withdraw the awarded quantity together with accrued curiosity upon compliance with formalities.
Case Title: The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Sabita Das & Ors.
Case No: F.M.A. 1044 of 2024
Leave a Reply