The Thane Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) has awarded ₹30 lakh in compensation to the family of a Mira Road resident, Johny C. Baby, who was fatally struck by a motor tanker while riding his motorcycle on the Mumbai-Ahmedabad Highway near Sativali Khind in December 2020.
The tribunal ruled that the insurance company, Royal Sundaram Alliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., failed to substantiate its claim that the deceased was not entitled to compensation. Based on the deceased’s monthly salary, the tribunal directed both the insurer and the vehicle owner to jointly pay the compensation amount.
In its order, the tribunal stated: “At the time of the accident, the deceased was returning home from work. The insurance firm argued that the injuries sustained by the deceased qualified as ‘employment injuries’ under the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948, and therefore, the petitioners could not claim compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. However, the insurance firm did not present any oral or documentary evidence to support these defenses or refute the petitioners’ evidence.”
Johny C. Baby met with the accident on December 28, 2020, while riding his motorcycle home to Mira Road. According to the petition filed by his family, Johny was riding at a slow and moderate speed on the left side of the road when a motor tanker approached from behind at excessive speed. The tanker, driven rashly and negligently, struck Johny from behind, causing him to fall and sustain severe head injuries. He was declared dead before being admitted to the hospital.
The deceased is survived by his 65-year-old mother, Thankamma Baby, his wife, Simi Johny (40), and their 12-year-old daughter. In their petition, the family claimed that Johny, aged 49, was employed as an R&D Manager with M/s Quiz Electronic LLP in Vasai, earning approximately ₹23,000 per month. They sought appropriate compensation for the loss of income and support.
The vehicle owner and the insurance company opposed the claim, alleging contributory negligence by the deceased. They also argued that Johny’s injuries fell under the category of “employment injuries” as he was returning from work at the time of the accident. Under Sections 53 and 61 of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948, they claimed the family was not eligible to seek compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
After reviewing the evidence, the tribunal rejected the insurer’s arguments. It held that while the insurance firm claimed the injuries were employment-related, it failed to prove this assertion. The tribunal emphasized that the family was entitled to compensation for the tragic loss, directing the insurer and the vehicle owner to pay ₹30 lakh jointly to the bereaved family.
