MACT claim: is state liable incase of vehicle without any do
Sheraz Aslam
(Querist) 31 March 2015
This query is : Resolved
Dear experts
In motor accident if the vehicle is uninsured and is without any documents...driver does not have a valid driving licence. Both the owner and driver are poor fellows and not able to pay the claim amount. In such a case is state liable to pay compensation for the reason that it is the duty of state to ensure that the passenger vehicles plying on public roads are in good condition and with all necessary documents.?
Thanks
Sheraz Aslam
Advocate
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 31 March 2015
Well, they can avoid liability to provide compensation.
They Can however file a separate suit to claim damages from state on the aforesaid ground.
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 01 April 2015
I have different opinion to the expert advise of Mr. Devajyoti Barman.
The award of a MACT in an accident is the liability of the owner and driver of the offending vehicle, if it is not insured. Government shall not pay the awarded amount to the claimant.
Sheraz Aslam
(Querist) 01 April 2015
If in a procession bomb blast occurs and people are injured, would they claim damages from person who caused bomb blast? .....NO.
In such a case state is liable because it is the obligation of the state to maintain law and order. There is a judgment on this point as well.
Does the ratio of this judgment apply to mact case where state has failed to ensure the fitness of vehicle and that the passenger vehicles plying on public roads have necessary documents. Is it not a dereliction of duty by state officials whether Regional transport official and the traffic cops
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 01 April 2015
The liability to compensate the victim lies with the owner of the vehicle / driver or insurance company. The vehicle was not insured, owner / driver would be responsible.
malipeddi jaggarao
(Expert) 01 April 2015
Mr.Aslam, your argument will not stand good. You can not compare both terrorist act and taking out the vehicle without proper documents. In the first actthe intention is to create the terror. In the second act, the persons who take out the vehicle would not have similar intention. What is your practical problem. This query needs to be posted in "forum" instead of "experts". Purely academic query.
Sheraz Aslam
(Querist) 01 April 2015
Mr. Jaggarao, thanks for your reply but I think you have not been able to understand the query. Kindly go through the query which is the first post in this thread.
malipeddi jaggarao
(Expert) 02 April 2015
Thanks for commenting that I had not been able to understand your query. Let me be like this only.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 04 April 2015
Expert Mr. Jagga Rao has clearly differentiated both the events mentioned by you in the earlier as well subsequent post and given a proper opinion, believe you have not understood what he conveyed. (?)
