1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present: The Hon’ble Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury F.M.A. 160 of 2012 With IA NO: CAN/1/2011 (Old No:CAN/8719/2011) The National Insurance Co. Ltd. VERSUS Azad Ali Tarafder @ Azad Tarafder @ Azad Ali & Anr. For the Appellant: For the Respondent: Mr. P. K. Pahari, Adv. Mr. Niranjan Maity, Adv. Mrs. Indrani Ghosh, Adv. Last Heard on: July 13, 2026 Judgment on: July 22, 2026 Biswaroop Chowdhury, J: The appellant before this Court was an opposite party in a claim under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 and is aggrieved by the Judgment and Award dated 12-07-2011 passed by Learned Additional District Judge 6th Court Alipore South 24 Parganas in MACC 165 of 2006 The case of the claimant before the Learned Trial Court may be summed up thus: 2 On 30-04-2005 at about 7 A.M. over Bakrahat Raypore Road, near Uma Cinema Hall within Bishnupur Police Station the victim Azad Ali Tarafder @ Azad Tarafder @ Azad Ali met with an accident caused by Vehicle No. WB-19 3111 (Bus) and thereby sustained severe fracture injuries on his person causing permanent disablement. Pursuant to filing of this case notice was issued upon the opposite parties. Opposite Party vehicle owner did not appear to contest the case. However opposite party Insurance Company contested the case by filing written statement. ISSUES were framed and evidence was adduced. Learned Trial Judge upon considering the evidence adduced and upon hearing the Learned Advocates was pleased to dispose the claim case by observing and directing as follows: ‘Hence it is ORDERED that the case be and the same filed under Section 163A of the M.V. Act is hereby allowed on contest against the O.P. No. 2 and ex-parte against the rest. The petitioner do get an award to the tune of Rs. 98,403/-. The OP. No. 2 is hereby directed to pay the amount awarded above together with its simple interest @8% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till actual payment within 30 days from this date in default the petitioner is entitled to realize the same under due process of law. It is needless to mention that running of interest will stop running from the date of deposit of the amount by the Insurance Company. ISSUE A/C Payee cheque in favour of the claimant/petitioner.’ 3 The appellant National Insurance Co. Ltd. being aggrieved by the Judgment and Award passed by Learned Trial Judge has come up with the instant appeal. Heard Learned Advocate for the appellant Insurance Company and Learned Advocate for the respondent/claimant. Perused the evidence adduced and materials on record. Learned Advocate for the appellant submits that the claim case is bad for non joinder of necessary party. Learned Advocate further submits that the vehicle being WB-19A-0784 which the claimant was driving met with an accident by dashing vehicle WB-19-3111 thus vehicle owner of WB-19A-0784 ought to have been made a party. Learned Advocate also submits that the Learned Trial Judge erred in holding that the accident took place due to use of vehicle No. WB-19-3111 when as per FIR and the Final Report of Police the victim himself the Driver of Tata Truck No. WB-19A-0784 was solely responsible for the said accident. Learned Advocate for the claimant/Respondent no-1 submits that the case was instituted under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 based on the principles of no-fault liability thus it is not necessary to implead vehicle owner of WB-19A-0784 which the claimant was driving. Learned Advocate further submits that the word use of motor vehicle has wide connotation thus accident caused due to stranding of vehicle comes under the purview. Learned Advocate also relies upon the following judicial decisions:- 4 Deepal Gisushbhai Soni and others. VS United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Reported in 2004 ACJ. 934. Kanai Manna VS United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors. Reported in 2009. ACJ. 544. Before proceeding to decide on the issue it is necessary to discuss the provisions contained in Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 which is repealed now. The provision contained in Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 stands as follows:- S. 163A-Special provisions as to payment of compensation on structured formula basis-1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force or instrument having the force or instrument having the force of law, the owner of the motor vehicle of the authorized insurer shall be liable to pay in the case of death or permanent disablement due to accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle compensation as indicated in the second schedule to the legal heirs or the victim as the case may be. Explanation-For the purposes of this sub-section ‘permanent disability’ shall have the same meaning and extent as in the Work men’s compensation Act 1923 (8 of 1923) 5 2) In any claim for compensation under sub-section (1) the claimant shall not be required to plead or establish that the death or permanent disablement in respect of which the claim has been made was due to any wrongful act or neglect or default of the owner of the vehicle or vehicles concerned as of any other person. 3) The Central Government may keeping in view the cost of living by notification in the official Gazette from time to time amend the second schedule. Thus upon considering the provision contained in Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 it is clear that in a case under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 the claimant/victim is not required to establish fault on the part of the vehicle against which claim is made but merely the use of the same. As use of motor vehicle has wide connotation as held in different judicial pronouncements the stranding of vehicle also comes under the purview. A driver driving a motor vehicle rashly may be prosecuted under Section 279/337 of the Indian Penal Code but when he suffers injury due to use of another vehicle as well as due to his own driving he cannot be deprived of compensation under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act as per the provisions contained therein. Section 163A being on the Principles of no fault liability the issue of contributory negligence of the victim also does not arise. 6 Learned Trial Judge upon considering the facts of the case and the Judicial decisions upon assigning reasons has awarded the compensation. Thus this court does not find any reason to interfere. Hence this Appeal FMA 160 of 2012 stands dismissed. Judgment and Award dated 12-07-2011 passed by Learned Additional District Judge 6th Court Alipore in MACC No. 165 of 2006, with regard to the Principal Compensation Awarded is affirmed. However with regard to interest this Court is of the view that interest of 6% per annum is just and reasonable and the same is reduced to 6%. The appellant Insurance Company shall deposit before Registrar General High Court Calcutta Rs. 98,403/- along with interest @6% p.a. from date of filing claim case till today. Such deposit shall be made within 8 weeks from date of communication of this Order. In the event compensation awarded by Learned Trial Court is already deposited no further deposit be made. The respondent/claimant will be entitled to withdraw the compensation amount along with interest upon compliance of necessary formalities. Balance amount if any along with accrued interest be returned to the Appellant Insurance Company. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, should be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities. (Biswaroop Chowdhury, J.)