Kerala High Court Interprets Meaning Of 'Month' For Ascertaining Limitation Period Of Claim Petitions Under MV Act

The Kerala High Court recently interpreted the meaning of the word 'Month' for the purposes of ascertaining the limitation period of six months as stipulated under the Motor Vehicles Amendment Act, 2019.

Justice Amit Rawal observed that,

"Sub-section (35) of Section 3 of the General Clauses Act, 1987 applicable to the State of Kerala would mean a month reckoned according to the British calendar, the same reads as ... : “month” shall mean a month reckoned according to the British calendar"".

The Court thus determined that the period of 6 months for filing claim petition under the Act, 2019 would have to be calculated from the date of the accident.

"By taking the definition of a month as the period to be counted for the purpose of limitation, filing of the claim petition within a period of six months has to be calculated from the date of accident".

The petitioner was hit by a car by the 1st respondent on May 10, 2022.

The claim petition was filed on November 10th, 2022 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. It was returned by the MACT by holding it to be barred by limitation in view of the Government notification dated 25.02.2022 read with Section 53 in Gazette No.51 dated 09.08.2019, whereby the amendment under the Motor Vehicles Act, 2019 came into effect with effect from 01.04.2022, and which has been incorporated in Section 166(3) of the said Act.

It was contended by Advocates R. Sreehari and Hamza A.V. on behalf of the petitioner that the MACT ought not to have returned the petition, and that it ought to have called the other side and framed the issues to adjudicate whether the claim petition is barred by limitation or not.

It was argued that the calculation of the period of six months has to be from the date of the accident and not by counting each day in a month. The counsels also placed reliance on the decision in Bibi Salma Khatoon v. State of Bihar (2001), whereby the Court had calculated the limitation period after taking note of the meaning of the word 'month' by excluding the date from which the limitation is stated to have commenced.

The Standing Counsel for the insurance company, Advocate P.K. Manoj Kumar argued that on plain calculation of the dates from the date of accident till the date of filing, the petition was filed beyond 180 days, and the MACT order was hence justified.

Finding that the claim petition had to be filed within a period of 6 months to be calculated from the date of the accident, the court ascertained that the the date of accident 10th November is the last date of six months on which date the claim petition was instituted.

The Court also placed reliance on the judgment in Bibi Salma Khatoon v. State of Bihar (2001), wherein the Court therein had perused the provisions of the local General Clauses Act and found that the intention of the legislature was months and not the days.

"I am of the view that MACT ought not to have returned the petition by calculating the limitation in the manner and mode as has been done. At the best, could have framed the issue and put the parties to lead evidence on that or hear the argument by taking into consideration the provisions of the law. Since I have already undertaken this exercise, it would be a farcical exercise for this Court to direct the learned MACT to frame the issue and decide the same," the Court said, while setting aside the impugned order of the MACT.

The Superintendent of the District Court was thereby directed to register the claim petition, allocate it to the competent court and to proceed with the same in accordance with law.

Case Title: Vimala Jose v. Aboobacker & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 670

Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment