Raj HC bars double compensation under MV Act and Workmen’s Compensation Act, sets aside WCC awards

Jaipur: The Rajasthan High Court has held that claimants are not entitled to seek compensation under both the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 for the same accident, reiterating the doctrine of election embodied in Section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Justice Anil Kumar Dhand held that once compensation has been claimed and received under one of the two enactments, a subsequent claim under the other statute is not maintainable and amounts to abuse of the process of law workman 1.

The court held that Section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act statutorily provides an option to the claimant to choose either remedy, but not both, and that courts cannot permit successive claims before different forums for the same incident or accident.

These observations were made while allowing two civil miscellaneous appeals filed by National Insurance Company Limited challenging awards passed by the Workmen Compensation Commissioners at Bundi and Jaipur.

The appeals arose out of two separate accidents. In one case, Jagdish died in a road accident on April 21, 2009. In the other, several persons sustained injuries in an accident on January 29, 2003. In both matters, the claimants had initially filed claim petitions before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunals at Bundi and Jaipur City under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The MACTs allowed the claim petitions and passed awards dated March 18, 2011 and November 4, 2004 respectively. The claimants received compensation amounts of Rs.4,44,000 and Rs.4,43,000 under the said awards.

After receiving compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, the claimants again filed claim petitions under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 before the Workmen Compensation Commissioners at Bundi and Jaipur City. These claims were also allowed, and awards dated December 10, 2012 and August 29, 2011 were passed granting compensation of Rs.4,11,900 and Rs.2,95,590 respectively, along with interest at the rate of 12 percent.

The insurance company challenged the subsequent awards contending that the claimants were barred from pursuing parallel remedies in view of Section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

After examining the record, the High Court held that for the same accidents, the claimants had availed two distinct remedies before two different forums, which is impermissible under law. The court referred to Section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act and relied upon judgments of the Supreme Court including National Insurance Company Limited vs Mastan and Another and New India Assurance Company Limited vs Bidami & Others.

The court held that the doctrine of election applies and that the claimants, having already received compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, were not entitled to pursue claims under the Workmen’s Compensation Act.

Accordingly, the High Court quashed and set aside the awards passed by the Workmen Compensation Commissioners in WCC Case Nos. 10/2011 and 185/2009. The court directed the claimants to refund the amounts received under the Workmen’s Compensation Act along with usual interest to the insurance company without delay.

With these directions, both civil miscellaneous appeals, along with stay applications, were disposed of.

Case Title

National Insurance Company Ltd. vs Manju Bai & Others
Connected with
National Insurance Company Ltd. vs Smt. Kamli Devi & Others

Case Numbers

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 143/2013
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 6491/2011

Court

High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench

Bench

Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand

Date of Judgment

January 28, 2026