NHAI Empowered To Lay And Maintain Roads, Cannot Be Mulcted With Liability Under Motor Vehicles Act: Madras High Court

Justice R Vijayakumar observed that the MV Act empowered the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to only pass an award against the insurer or owner or driver of the vehicle and thus did not have jurisdiction to entertain a tortious claim against any person not named under Section 168 of the Act. The court thus set aside an order of the MACT which had imposed liability on the NHAI for the death of a person.

“The authority who is empowered with the laying of the road or maintenance of the road cannot be mulcted with the liability under the Motor Vehicles Act. The Motor Vehicles Tribunal is just a statutory authority under the Motor Vehicles Act and it does not have any jurisdiction to entertain the tortious claim as against any other person who had not been named under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act,” the court said.

The court was hearing an appeal filed by the NHAI against an order passed by the MACT, Madurai. The original claimants were family members of the deceased who was riding a two-wheeler at the time of the accident. It was submitted that the deceased had dashed against the left side of a lorry which was parked on the wrong side of the road due to a puncture of the rear tire during night hours without any signal or any danger lights in the Madurai-Trichy main road.

The claimants argued that the entire negligence was on the part of the driver of the lorry, who parked the vehicle without any signal during night hours and sought compensation of Rs. 15,00,000. The insurance company claimed that the vehicle was falsely implicated and that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving on the part of the deceased person. The company claimed that the vehicle was parked with signals and danger lights and it was the driver who dashed into the vehicle.

While the claim petition was pending, the MACT had suo moto impleaded the NHAI on the ground that they did not provide safe roads or took any action to remove the vehicle that was parked in the middle of the road without any parking lights. The tribunal thus noted that the NHAI was responsible for the accident. The tribunal passed an order directing the insurance company to pay the compensation and recover 35% of the award amount from the NHAI. This order was challenged in the present case.

The NHAI submitted that it was a statutory body, meant for implementing the projects of laying down roads and maintaining it. It argued that the accident took place due to the negligence of the deceased and that the NHAI was in no way connected to the accident and could not be mulcted with liability.

The insurance company however defended the order and contended that if the NHAI had towed away the vehicle under repair, the accident would not have happened. Thus, the insurance company claimed that the order of MACT was proper.

The court noted that claimants had made no allegation against the NHAI and it was the MACT who suo motu impleaded the NHAI. The court also noted that the tribunal had exceeded its jurisdiction and mulcted liability on the NHAI without considering it's pleadings. The court thus deemed it fit to set aside the order of the tribunal and confirmed the entire liability on the insurance company.

Counsel for the Appellants: Mr.R.Rajagobal

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr.V.Sakthivel

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 403

Case Title: The Regional Officer, NHAI v K Vasuki and Others

Case No: C.M.A(MD)No.629 of 2019