Tribunal Rejects Compensation Claim in Hydraulic Operator's Tragic Death

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal of Thane rejected a compensation claim made by the family of hydraulic operator Govind Bandgar, who died following an accident involving a hydraulic dumper. The claim was dismissed due to a lack of proven negligence, a crucial requirement under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) of Thane dismissed a compensation request from the family of late hydraulic operator Govind Bandgar, citing insufficient evidence of negligence. The incident occurred on May 7, 2005, when Bandgar was severely injured by a hydraulic dumper, which he was operating.

Bandgar succumbed to his injuries five years later, sparking a claim for compensation by his widow, Mahananda, and their three sons. However, MACT member SN Shah ruled that since the accident did not involve another vehicle and no clear negligence was established, the claim could not proceed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

The tribunal emphasized that proof of negligence is a prime requisite of Section 166, and without demonstrating negligence leading to injury or death by a motor vehicle, the compensation claim remains unsubstantiated.

(With inputs from agencies.)