Motor Accidents, the largest cause for injuries and death

There are more persons dying and getting maimed by injuries in motor accidents every year than anyone single factor, other than natural illness and old age contributing to deaths and injuries. The most used mode of transport is also the most abused. The civil response to human tragedies wrought through accidents is to ensure a financial recompense through Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals constituted under the Motor Vehicles Act. To ensure that the accident victim or his family gets what is due, the other important player is the insurance company. The law that provides for various situations that enable the claim for compensation, the mode of determining the quantum, the person liable for payment, the forum for adjudication and the matters to be established at the trial are all set out by the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act.

  Basis of claim is normally rash or negligent driving of a motor vehicle

Accidents resulting in injuries or death arise out of use of motor vehicles by rash or negligent driving. They could arise by a speeding vehicle in a hit and run situation, when the identity of the vehicle is not noticed or by collisions between vehicles in public places, vehicle hitting against a tree when passengers in the vehicle get injured or killed. There is a compulsory system of insuring a vehicle against third party risk, so that the victim or his legal representatives have a solvent insurance company to proceed against for claiming compensation. Vehicles run by State Transport Corporations are obligated to set up their own funds from which amounts of compensation could be defrayed. The respective state governments are also obligated by law to establish funds for meeting the claims of victims of accidents of hit and run cases, where the identity of the owner of the vehicle is not traced.

Quantum of compensation

A victim of an accident is entitled to compensation for injuries that shall be quantified by the extent of loss that may arise out of it. They shall include, the hospital expenses for treatment of the injuries, the loss of income or salary during the period of treatment, transport expenses, loss of amenities of life when the injury causes permanent or temporary disablement, damages for pain and suffering, expenses for attendants and every conceivable item of reasonable expenditure that has a proximate bearing for the injuries sustained. In cases of death, the legal representatives, who may include even apart from legal heirs, persons who were dependent on the deceased, shall be compensated in damages to an amount which they would have benefited if he or she had been alive. The quantification of damage is in some sense a technical exercise, when the attempt shall be to assess the extent of loss of dependence on the deceased deducting the sums which the deceased would have spent on personal expenses, hospital expenses, funeral expenses, damages for loss of consortium to a spouse and for loss of love and affection for children.

Persons liable to pay compensation

The owner of the offending vehicle and the insurer are jointly and severally liable for damages for a motor accident in a public place. Even without proof of negligence of the driver, the MV Act makes it possible to claim the amount of damages on a structured formula given under the Act. A person who causes the accident, if he is employed by an owner of the vehicle shall be entitled to claim compensation against his employer and the insurer under the Workmen’s Compensation Act but in other situations, the tort-feasor himself shall not be allowed the benefit of compensation. An owner of goods traveling along with the goods and load men up to 6 persons shall be the only class of persons in a goods vehicle who shall have the benefit of insurance cover. Other passengers in a goods vehicle could have remedy only against the owner of the vehicle and not against the insurer. Because, the insurer covers the risk only due to negligence of the driver, the insurer’s defence to deny the claim shall be restricted only certain situations and law specifically bars certain types of defences. For example, the insurer shall be allowed to contend that the terms of insurance exclude the use of the vehicle for hire or reward, for organized racing or speed testing, or rely on the permit conditions of a transport vehicle or bar against the use of a side car being attached to a vehicle or that the driver had not a valid driving licence for denying liability. The insurer shall not be permitted to take up defences relating to quantum of compensation or deny rashness or negligence, unless the court specifically grants permission in writing to take such defences, where there is proof of collusion between the claimant and the owner of the vehicle.

Towards a better compensation regime

The claim for compensation shall be pursued in a tribunal which will have jurisdiction in places where the accident has taken place or where the claimant ordinarily resides. Important changes of law relating to claims for damages in motor accidents have come through judicial pronouncements. Compensation for hit and run cases, unrestricted liability of insurer for a passenger in a transport vehicle, owner of goods traveling in a goods vehicle have all been newer classes of persons benefited by change of law. System of claiming compensation on a strict liability norm, without having to prove rashness or negligence of a driver, is also a new development. The Supreme Court has been rooting for still better changes in law that will enable a claimant to obtain just compensation in cases where the driver did not have a driving licence, provide for annuities to dependents instead of paying lump sum compensation, satisfaction of claims even without having to go to court, besides stricter compliance of existing provisions for police to maintain accident information register that will simultaneously record details of accidents and dispatch details to jurisdictional claims tribunal to address the claims of victims. The Legal Services Authority established at the centre and states have been playing significant riles in organizing lok adalats that make way for large scale disposal of accident cases.