Motor Vehicles Act | Claim U/S 163A Will Not Lie Against Anyone Other Than Owner Or Insurer: Kerala High Court

Section 163A deals with special provisions as to payment of compensation on a structured formula basis.

Justice C.Pratheep Kumar relying upon the Division Bench decision in United India Insurance Co.Ltd., v. Madhavan M (2011) observed thus:

“Though in the above decision, the question whether a claim under Section 163A will lie against anybody other than the owner or insurer did not arise directly, the observation referred above substantiates the conclusion that a claim under Section 163A (1) of the MV Act will not lie against a person other than the owner and insurer of the motor vehicle, especially because, in a claim under Section 163A (1) there is no necessity to plead or establish negligence.”

In this case, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal ordered for compensation to the parents who lost their son in a motor vehicle accident in their original petition. The accident occurred due to a trench taken in the road which was filled with water.

The Tribunal directed the insurer to pay compensation of rupees 3,43,500 along with interest to the parents.

The Tribunal further permitted the insurer to recover the compensation amount from officials of the construction company who permitted construction of the trench on the road for laying the pipe line.

Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the officials of the construction company have approached the High Court.

The Court referred to Section 163A of the MV Act. It noted that section 163A (1) states that owner of the motor vehicle or the authorised insurer shall be liable to pay compensation in the case of death or permanent disablement from motor vehicle accident.

Court added, “On a perusal of the above provision it can be seen that the liability to pay compensation under the above provision is only to “the owner of the motor vehicle or the authorised insurer”

Further, the Court referred to Section 163A (2) which states that the claimant does not have to plead or establish that the accident occurred due to the any wrongful act or neglect or default of the owner of the vehicle or of any other person.

The Court referred to the decision in United India Insurance Co.Ltd (supra) to state that claim would only lie against owner and insurer, and not against the driver of the vehicle.

As such, the Court allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the Tribunal to the extent it permits the insurer to recover compensation amount from the officials of the construction company.

Case Title: Ramakrishnan Nair V P J Varghese

Case No: MACA NO. 2294 OF 2012

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 198