Legal heirs cannot claim Section 166 compensation when the deceased driver was solely negligent.

The appellant, mother and legal heir of deceased Prakash Mahobia, filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation of ₹52,90,000 for his death in a motorcycle accident on 6 September 2017.

The deceased was riding motorcycle No. CG-06-A-1438 from Chhuikhadan to Khairagarh when the accident occurred near Dhimreen Kuan Chowk.

Although the claim was pleaded as a case of the motorcycle slipping and falling, the FIR and final report indicated that the deceased, while driving rashly and negligently, struck a bicycle from behind, fell from the motorcycle, and later died from his injuries.

The motorcycle had allegedly been purchased by Tilak Ram Mahobia from respondent Sewakram Humdev, its registered owner, and was not insured at the relevant time.

The Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Khairagarh, dismissed the claim petition by award dated 3 October 2019, leading to the present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Whether the legal heir of a deceased person who was himself driving the motorcycle and was found responsible for the accident is entitled to compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988?

Whether the registered owner of the motorcycle could be held liable where the deceased was driving a borrowed vehicle, the accident resulted from his own negligence, and the vehicle was uninsured?

Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act requires the claimant to establish a legally compensable motor-vehicle accident involving the negligence of the respondent or another tortfeasor.

Relying on Ningamma v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., (2009) 13 SCC 509, the Court held that the legal heirs of an owner who dies while driving his own vehicle, or of a borrower who steps into the shoes of the owner, cannot claim compensation for the deceased’s own negligence; a person cannot obtain compensation for his own wrong.

The Court also relied on G. Nagarathna v. G. Manjunatha, 2024 Supreme (Kar) 1260, which, following Ningamma and Minu B. Mehta v. Balkrishna Ramchandra Nayan, held that the heirs of a self-tortfeasor cannot maintain a claim under Section 166 where the deceased’s rash and negligent driving caused the accident.

The principle under Section 163A, as discussed in Ningamma, similarly excludes claims by the heirs of an owner or borrower who died while driving the vehicle.

The FIR and final report established that the deceased was driving the motorcycle after borrowing it from Tilak Ram Mahobia and that his rash and negligent driving caused the collision and subsequent fall.

The investigation treated the deceased as the accused, and the case was thereafter closed following his death.

Since the deceased was the person responsible for the accident, he was a self-tortfeasor and, as a borrower, stood in the position of the vehicle’s owner for the purposes of liability.

Accordingly, the registered owner could not be held liable for the deceased’s own negligence, particularly when the vehicle was uninsured and no negligence attributable to the respondent was proved.

The Tribunal’s finding that the claimant was not entitled to compensation was therefore consistent with the governing precedents and the evidence on record.

The Tribunal’s award dated 3 October 2019 was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed as devoid of merit.