Liability To Compensate Can't Be Fastened On Owner If Vehicle Was Plying Beyond Permit Route For Relief Works: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court recently came to the rescue of a bus owner who was asked by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to compensate the victims of an accident, that occurred while the bus was plying beyond its permit route.

Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar noted that the bus was carrying out relief works and hence, the owner cannot be asked to pay compensation by exonerating the Insurance company. It observed,

“The offending vehicle was used as a relief vehicle. Therefore, there is no fundamental breach proved so as to exonerate the Insurance Company. The Tribunal, in this regard, has committed an error...mere deviation of rules in the circumstances as above discussed is not amounting t fundamental breach so as to exonerate the Insurance Company to pay compensation to the owner.”

As per factual matrix of the case a biker and the pillion rider were hit by a private bus stated to be driven in a rash and negligent manner, leading to grievous injuries.

The Tribunal allowed their claims and awarded compensation but fastened liability on the owner of the bus for the reason that the bus travelled on the route other than the permitted one, thereby violating permit conditions.

The Tribunal applying Section 66 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, observed that the bus did not have permit to travel up to Haveri, where the accident occurred.

The bus owner claimed that the offending bus was sent to Haveri as a 'relief vehicle' for carrying passengers of another bus that had broken down.

The High Court referred to Rule 57 of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 which reads thus: “Exemption from Section 66.—The provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 66, shall not apply to any transport vehicle used as a relief vehicle for carrying passengers and their luggage from a disabled stage carriage to the place of destination.”

Applying the above to the facts and circumstances of this case, the Court allowed the appeal.

Appearance: Advocate B.M Patil for Appellant.

Advocate Sanjay S Katageri FOR R1.

Advocate S S Koliwad for R2.

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 213

Case Title: Basvaraj AND K M Altaf Hussain & Others

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101342 OF 2017 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101341 OF 2017 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101568 OF 2017 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101569 OF 2017.

Click Here To Read/Download Order