Broken Tree Branch Kills Bike Rider - Karnataka HC Allows Legal Heirs' Claim Under Section 163A Motor Vehicle Act 1988

Last updated: 21 October 2022
Quick Summary
The Karnataka High Court has ruled that legal heirs can claim compensation under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, even when a death is caused by a fallen tree branch, not directly by a vehicle's fault. The court clarified that under Section 163A, proof of negligence isn't required. However, it found that the deceased, who had borrowed the vehicle, stepped into the owner's shoes. Therefore, the claim was allowed based on the 'personal accident cover to insured-cum-driver' for which additional premium was paid, limiting the compensation to £1,00,000.

Court :
Karnataka High Court

Brief :
This appeal is filed challenging the judgement and award passed in MVC No.3020/2007 dated 05.02.2011 on the file of II Additional District and Sessions Judge and Additional MACT, Belagavi, questioning the liability and quantum of compensation.

Citation :
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS SMT.SUSILA W/O. SHAMRAO PATIL

Daily Limit Reached

You have reached your daily limit of 2 Free Judgements

Subscribe to CCI PRO for unlimited access

Why Upgrade to CCI PRO?
  • No Ads
  • WhatsApp Broadcasts
  • Daily E-Newsletter
  • Unlimited Judgements Access
BEST VALUE
2 YEAR PLAN
3,499
(Inclusive of GST)
1 YEAR PLAN
1,999
(Inclusive of GST)
View all CCI PRO benfits

Already a PRO member? Login here for an ad-free experience.

 
Comments

Join CAclubindia WhatsApp Finance Community & stay updated with the latest TAX news, compliance alerts and important updates all in one place!

Recent Judgments :

  1. No 10% pre-deposit required on any Penalty-only order from SCN issued prior to October 01, 2025
  2. Ratification is no substitute for recommendation - Notifications travelling beyond GST Council recommendations are ultra vires
  3. Disparity between seigniorage fee paid and supply value declared in GSTR-1 justifies invocation of extended period of limitation under Section 74 of the CGST Act
  4. Interest on Delayed Payment of GST Arises by Operation of Law and Cannot be Waived by Courts
  5. Supreme Court to examine whether the six-month time limit for issuance of show cause notice under Section 74(2) of the CGST Act is mandatory or directory
  6. Advocates ought to be summoned only in rare and exceptional circumstances
  7. Unsigned Assessment Order in Form GST DRC-07 is Invalid as Absence of the Assessing Officer's Signature is an Incurable Jurisdictional Defect
  8. SC to examine whether an assessee can be relegated to the appellate remedy, when the challenge is to a binding Circular
  9. Mere Expiry of E-Way Bill Without Intent to Evade Tax Cannot Justify 200% Penalty
  10. No GST Levy on Assignment of Leasehold Rights of Industrial Plots as Supreme Court Dismisses Revenue's SLPs

View More Judgments »


Trending Online Classes

view all classess

CCI Pro
Meet our CAclubindia PRO Members
Pro Member Pavithra DossPavithra DossPro Member CA Sunny SharmaCA Sunny SharmaPro Member shubham agrawalshubham agrawalPro Member Super Vk ChariSuper Vk ChariPro Member R NATARAJANR NATARAJAN
Subscribe to Pro
Join an elite circle of professionals

Browse by Category




Follow