The instant appeal has been filed assailing the final order dated 06.09.2018 passed by the High Court of Allahabad in First Appeal from Order No 3303 of 2018, vide which the appeal preferred by the appellant against the award dated 04.05.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short ‘ MACT ’) in MACP No 1107 of 2012 has been dismissed. FIR was lodged against the driver as well as owner of the offending vehicle and on 19.01.2012, claim petition was filed by claimants before MACT seeking compensation of Rs. The High Court vide impugned order affirmed the findings of MACT and held that the vehicle owner failed to produce the original permit and also could not get the same proved calling the person from the Transport Department, in absence, the Claims Tribunal rightly decided the issue of liability against the owner. It was further contended that the appellant had valid permit as he deposited the due fee on the next day after the date of issuance of permit and hence, the finding of Courts below that the appellant did not have a valid permit, as such fastened the liability for payment of compensation is unjust. The appellant has failed to give any explanation to refute the observations made by MACT to ply the vehicle on Roorkee by-pass to Haridwar via Meerut which did not fall within the route of permit issued by Transport Authority. Emphasis has been made to the ‘Objects and Reasons’ of Motor Vehicles Amendment Act, 2019 (for short “M.V. While determining compensation, he/she is required to be compensated as he/she cannot sue again, therefore, the determination of compensation of the damages is an extreme task.
Learned counsel for the parties and learned amici curiae have mainly advanced their arguments with respect to M.V. Amendment Act in particular Chapter XI thereof, inter alia, emphasizing the importance of Sections 146, 149, 159, 160, 161, 164, 166 of the M.V. Prior to the amendment of Act and Rules, as per the directions issued by the Delhi High Court and this Court, the standard operating procedure formulated and circulated to all the High Courts was observed by choice, and the outcome of its implementation was negligible. Jaibir Singh & Ors., 2017
SCC Online Del 4306’
(for short “ Rajesh Tyagi III” ) have been relied upon, in addition to refer the provisions of M.V. In the said case, the Court while dealing with the question of effective implementation of Delhi Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Rules, 2008 and Section 158(6) of M.V. Mandatory intimation of factum of the accident by Investigating Officer to the Claims Tribunal within 48 hours of the accident and if information about insurance company is available by that time, then intimation to the concerned insurance company by email; 2. Discretion of the Claims Tribunal on application made for extension of time in cases where the Investigating Officer is unable to complete the investigation within 30 days for reasons beyond his control; 7. Assessment of compensation by designated officer accompanied with reasoned order which shall constitute a legal offer to the claimants and in case, when such offer is acceptable to the claimant, Claims Tribunal to pass a consent award with a further 30 days’ time for the insurance company to deposit the amount; 13. Another notable effort was made by this Court in ‘ Jai Prakash I ’ (supra), wherein this Court identified majorly four issues i.e., firstly, grant of compensation in cases of ‘hit and run where the vehicles remain unidentified which do not have insurance cover having third party insurance but carrying persons not covered by the insurance’; secondly, ‘widespread practice of using goods vehicles for passenger traffic’; thirdly, ‘procedural delays in adjudication of claims by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and following hardships to the victims; and fourthly, ‘the full amount of compensation not reaching the victims, particularly to those who are uneducated’. Director General of Police for each State is directed to instruct all Police Stations in the State to comply with provisions of Section 158(6) of Motor Vehicles Act (pre 2019 Amendment) and submit Accident Information Report in Form no. In case of non-dispute of liability by insurance company, Tribunal shall make an endeavor to determine the compensation amount by summary enquiry or refer the matter to Lok Adalat for settlement and dispose-off the claim petition itself within a time frame not exceeding six months from the date of registration of claim petition; 5. In case of death and non-dispute of liability by insurance company, endeavor shall be made by insurance company to pay compensation as per standard formula to the family (legal representatives) of deceased without waiting for decision of Tribunal or settlement by Lok Adalat; 2. Secure compensation to the victims of road accidents involving uninsured vehicles by directing the owner of vehicle to offer security or deposit an amount adequate to satisfy the award as a condition precedent for release of seized vehicle. The suggestions were duly considered, and Delhi High Court vide order dated 12.12.2014 in ‘ Rajesh Tyagi II ’ (supra) incorporated the suggestions and appended the modified Claims Tribunal Agreed Procedure to be implemented with effect from 01.02.2015 for a period of six months subject to review after expiry of three months.
Duty of insurance companies to get DAR verified by their surveyor within 20 days of the receipt of copy of DAR (Clause 20); Report of the Designated Officer of insurance company shall be in Form III of modified procedure (Clause 21); Duty of Claims Tribunal to elicit the truth and satisfy itself that the statements made in DAR are true before passing the award (Clause 24); 8. Claims Tribunal to pass an appropriate order for protection of award amount (Clause 28); Claims Tribunal shall deal with the compliance of provisions in award (Clause 29); 12. The modified procedure approved by Delhi High Court was brought on record and after perusal, this Court observed as follows: “We have also perused the procedure, which has been placed before us as Annexure R5 with the response which, in our view, appears to be a comprehensive one and that we can issue further directions to the Registrar General of the Delhi High Court to ensure that procedure is strictly followed insofar as Delhi is concerned and also circulate the said procedure to all the other High Courts and the Registrar General of all the other High Courts are directed to ensure that the said procedure is implemented through the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in coordination with the Legal Service Authorities as well as the Director General of Police of the States concerned.” Subsequently, this Court vide order dated 06.11.2017, modified its earlier order dated 13.05.2016 and directed all States to implement the ‘ CTA ModifiedP ’ while observing as follows – “The order dated 13.05.2016 will therefore stand modified to the extent that Justice Midha has himself modified his earlier order on 12 December, 2014.
List the matter on 23 January, 2018.” In pursuance of the implementation of the guidelines, the proceedings in Rajesh Tyagi I (supra) continued before Delhi High Court and vide order dated 07.12.2018 (for short ‘ Rajesh Tyagi III ’), the Delhi High Court incorporated few more directions in the modified CTAP. Lastly, this Court also directed the Claim Tribunals pan India to implement ‘Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme’ (for short ‘ MACAD Scheme ’) as formulated by Delhi High Court in Rajesh Tyagi III (supra). Insurance Company is supposed to look into the same to find out as to whether the claim is payable and within 30 days it should respond to MACT and once all these documents are before the MACT in the form of evidence etc., as well, it would enable the MACT to decide the case within 30 days…….
Thus, direction for implementation of the ‘Claims Tribunal Agreed Procedure’ which is substituted by modified procedure, as noted above, are already there. ‘Chapter XI – Insurance of Motor Vehicles against third party risks’ and Chapter XII – Claims Tribunals were amended as per the Motor Vehicle Amendment Act, 2019 which came into force w.e.f. — (1) No person shall use, except as a passenger, or cause or allow any other person to use, a motor vehicle in a public place, unless there is in force in relation to the use of the vehicle by that person or that other person, as the case may be, a policy of insurance with the requirements of this Chapter: [Provided that in the case of a vehicle carrying, or meant to carry, dangerous or hazardous goods, there shall also be a policy of insurance under the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 (6 of 1991).] Explanation.
(3) The appropriate Government may, by order, exempt from the operation of sub-section (1) any vehicle owned by any of the following authorities, namely:— (a) the Central Government or a State Government, if the vehicle is used for Government purposes connected with any commercial enterprise; (b) any local authority; (c) any State transport undertaking: Provided that no such order shall be made in relation to any such authority unless a fund has been established and is maintained by that authority in accordance with the rules made in that behalf under this Act for meeting any liability arising out of the use of any vehicle of that authority which that authority or any person in its employment may incur to third parties. —For the purposes of this sub-section, “appropriate Government” means the Central Government or a State Government, as the case may be, and— (i) in relation to any corporation or company owned by the Central Government or any State Government, means the Central Government or that State Government; (ii) in relation to any corporation or company owned by the Central Government and one or more State Governments, means the Central Government; (iii) in relation to any other State transport undertaking or any local authority, means that Government which has control over that undertaking or authority. Thus, exemptions permitted to the class and category of the vehicles of the Central Government and State Government are only subject to the order of the appropriate Government on establishing and maintaining fund by such authority.
— (1) In order to comply with the requirements of this Chapter, a policy of insurance must be a policy which— (a) is issued by a person who is an authorised insurer; and (b) insures the person or classes of persons specified in the policy to the extent specified in sub-section (2)— (i) against any liability which may be incurred by him in respect of the death of or bodily [injury to any person, including owner of the goods or his authorised representative carried in the vehicle] or damage to any property of a third party caused by or arising out of the use of the vehicle in a public place; (ii) against the death of or bodily injury to any passenger of a public service vehicle caused by or arising out of the use of the vehicle in a public place: Provided that a policy shall not be required— (i) to cover liability in respect of the death, arising out of and in the course of his employment, of the employee of a person insured by the policy or in respect of bodily injury sustained by such an employee arising out of and in the course of his employment other than a liability arising under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923) in respect of the death (2) Subject to the proviso to sub-section (1), a policy of insurance referred to in sub-section (1), shall cover any liability incurred in respect of any accident, up to the following limits, namely:— (a) save as provided in clause (b), the amount of liability incurred; (b) in respect of damage to any property of a third party, a limit of rupees six thousand: Provided that any policy of insurance issued with any limited liability and in force, immediately before the commencement of this Act, shall continue to be effective for a period of four months after such commencement or till the date of expiry of such policy whichever is earlier. (4) Where a cover note issued by the insurer under the provisions of this Chapter or the rules made thereunder is not followed by a policy of insurance within the prescribed time, the insurer shall, within seven days of the expiry of the period of the validity of the cover note, notify the fact to the registering authority in whose records the vehicle to which the cover note relates has been registered or to such other authority as the State Government may prescribe. The relevant provisions with respect to the information and duties of the police officer and registering authority have been specified under Sections 159 and 160 of the M.V.
A registering authority or the officer-in-charge of a police station shall, if so required by a person who alleges that he is entitled to claim compensation in respect of an accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle, or if so required by an insurer against whom a claim has been made in respect of any motor vehicle, furnish to that person or to that insurer, as the case may be, on payment of the prescribed fee, any information at the disposal of the said authority or the said police officer relating to the identification marks and other particulars of the vehicle and the name and address of the person who was using the vehicle at the time of the accident or was injured by it and the property, if any, damaged in such form and within such time as the Central Government may prescribe.” The police officer and registering authority are supposed to discharge their functions to facilitate and furnish the information on payment of prescribed fees to the person entitled for compensation or to insurer, against whom the claim has been made. The Investigating Officer shall inspect site of accident, take photographs/videos of scene and vehicle involved, followed by preparation of site plan drawn to scale as to indicate the width of road(s) as the case may be and other relevant factors including the persons and vehicles involved in the accident. The injured/victim(s), legal representative(s), State Legal Services Authority, insurer shall also be provided the copy of Form-I and the same must be uploaded on the website of the State Police, if available. On failure to submit the relevant information and documents, as required in Forms III, IV and VI by the driver(s), owner(s), claimant(s) or any information by the insurance company, the Investigating Officer may ask for direction to the stakeholder(s) before the Claims Tribunal to furnish such information within 15 days. The Investigating Officer shall within 90 days compile all relevant documents and material in the form of Detailed Accident Report ( DAR ) in Form-VII accompanying site plan Form-VIII, mechanical inspection report Form-IX, verification report Form-X and the report under Section 173 Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) It would be the duty of the registering authority to verify the registration certificate, driving licence, fitness and permit in respect of the vehicle(s) involved in the accident and the same is required to be submitted within 15 days to the Investigating Officer to complete the IAR and DAR. Act, the Officer In-charge of the police station and the registering authority are required to act upon in a manner as prescribed in the Rules within the period as specified, thereby on receiving the information of accident, the complete information regarding such accident is to be made available before the Claims Tribunal within the time limit without delay.
Thus, legislative intent is clear that on reporting a road accident the Investigation Officer must complete all his action within time frame and shall act as facilitator to the victim(s)/claimant(s), insurance company by furnishing all details in prescribed forms, thereby claimant(s) may get damages/compensation without delay. (3) If, the claimant to whom the offer is made under sub-section (2), — (a) accepts such offer, — (i) the Claims Tribunal shall make a record of such settlement, and such claim shall be deemed to be settled by consent; and (ii) the payment shall be made by the insurance company within a maximum period of thirty days from the date of receipt of such record of settlement; (b) rejects such offer, a date of hearing shall be fixed by the Claims Tribunal to adjudicate such claim on merits. In case, the offer is accepted, the Claims Tribunal shall record the settlement and treat such a claim as settled by consent.
Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force or instrument having the force of law, the owner of the motor vehicle or the authorised insurer shall be liable to pay in the case of death or grievous hurt due to any accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, a compensation of a sum of five lakh rupees in case of death or of two and a half lakh rupees in case of grievous hurt to the legal heirs or the victim, as the case may be. It is further made clear the compensation, if payable in any other law, then such amount is required to be reduced from the amount of compensation payable under this Section, meaning thereby the legislative intent is clear that a person, who has suffered with an accident must be compensated just and reasonably and the victim(s)/family of the deceased must be paid for the bodily injury or loss of life caused by an accident by use of a motor vehicle at a public place. — (1) An application for compensation arising out of an accident of the nature specified in sub-section (1) of section 165 may be made — (a) by the person who has sustained the injury; or (b) by the owner of the property; or (c) where death has resulted from the accident, by all or any of the legal representatives of the deceased; or (d) by any agent duly authorized by the person injured or all or any of the legal representatives of the deceased, as the case may be: Provided that where all the legal representatives of the deceased have not joined in any such application for compensation, the application shall be made on behalf of or for the benefit of all the legal representatives of the deceased and the legal representatives who have not so joined, shall be impleaded as respondents to the application. Provided further that where a person accepts compensation under section 164 in accordance with the procedure provided under section 149, his claims petition before the Claims Tribunal shall lapse.] [(2) Every application under sub-section (1) shall be made, at the option of the claimant, either to the Claims Tribunal having jurisdiction over the area in which the accident occurred or to the Claims Tribunal within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the claimant resides or carries on business or within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the defendant resides, and shall be in such form and contain such particulars as may be prescribed: [(3) No application for compensation shall be entertained unless it is made within six months of the occurrence of the accident.] [(4) The Claims Tribunal shall treat any report of accidents forwarded to it under section 159 as an application for compensation under this Act.]
[(5) Notwithstanding anything in this Act or any other law for the time being in force, the right of a person to claim compensation for injury in an accident shall, upon the death of the person injured, survive to his legal representatives, irrespective of whether the cause of death is relatable to or had any nexus with the injury or not.] On perusal, it is clear that in the case of injuries or of death or of damage of property arising out of motor accident at a public place, application for grant of compensation can be submitted directly to the Claims Tribunal by the claimants. But, in case the compensation has not been accepted under Section 149 or the recourse of Section 164 has not been taken, the Claims Tribunal, in whose jurisdiction the accident occurred, shall treat the report of Section 159 as claim petition under this Act and may proceed to decide the same in accordance with law. Amendment Act by which in case the claimant(s) have failed to take recourse either under Section 164 or Section 166 within the prescribed period of limitation, the report submitted by the investigating officer to the Claims Tribunal, within whose jurisdiction the accident occurred, may be treated as claim application under Section 166(4) and would not debar the claimant(s) to seek compensation if he/they could not file the application under Section 166(1) of the Act. Amendment Act emphasizes the need to pay compensation to the claimant(s) or legal representative(s) and decide the claim by taking recourse whatever is opted by the claimant(s) at the earliest and the family should not be left to suffer without payment of damages. The Claims Tribunal is required to examine the FAR, IAR or DAR, as the case may be and in the proceedings of the said Miscellaneous Application, appropriate direction for production of requisite forms prescribed in the Rules through claimant(s), driver(s), owner(s) or extension of time, as specified, may be directed. It shall also be the duty of the Investigating Officer to intimate the Nodal Officer of the insurance company and also the insurance company to secure their presence on such date.
The said officer shall make an offer to the claimant(s) for settlement before the Claims Tribunal, specifying the details of offer and submit the said proposal within 30 days of DAR in Form-XI along with the report of the surveyor/investigator. In case the offer made by the Designated Officer is not accepted by the claimant(s), rejecting such offer, the claimant(s) are required to file relevant material asking more amount of compensation for which the date of hearing shall be fixed by the Tribunal to adjudicate the claim on merit. The claimant(s) have been given three options to claim compensation before the Claims Tribunal.
Amendment Rules, the police officer is required to furnish the details to the victim(s) regarding his/their rights in a road accident and the flow chart of the scheme along with Form-II is required to be furnished to them.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/acquittal-in-kidnapping-and-abduction-case-courts-legal-analysis/
The Claims Tribunal is also duty bound to take immediate action and to proceed in the matter as required under the Act and the Rules. If the claimant(s) has not opted for taking recourse under Section 166(1) within the time limit of six months, such Miscellaneous Application may be treated as an application under Section 166(4) of M.V. In our view, the argument as advanced is having force, therefore, we direct that on initiation of the proceedings under Section 149 registering a Miscellaneous Application by the Claims Tribunal, in whose jurisdiction the accident occurred would continue until the proceedings under Section 166 has been filed by the claimant(s) separately.
In case the claimant(s)/legal representative(s) have filed different applications under Section 166 before different Claim Tribunals at different places outside the territorial jurisdiction of one High Court, in the said contingency the Claims Tribunal, where the first claim petition is filed shall have jurisdiction to adjudicate and decide the same and other claim petition(s) filed by the claimant(s)/legal representative(s) in the territorial limits of other High Courts shall stand transferred to the Claims Tribunal where the first claim petition was filed and the proceedings under Section 149 shall be tagged with the said file. Amendment Act is not possible within the prescribed period of time, therefore directions may be issued to prepare the distribution memos by the High Courts with respect to police stations and Claims Tribunals in order to implement the recourse of Section 149 of the M.V. It is also made clear that if the claimant(s) have not taken any recourse under Section 166, then the miscellaneous application be treated as claim petition under Section 166(4) of the M.V.
In case, the said offer is not accepted by the claimant(s), the onus would shift on the claimant(s) to seek for enhancement of the amount of compensation and the said enquiry under Section 149(3) would be limited for enhancement only. Amendment Act opting jurisdiction of Claims Tribunal as specified under Section 166(2), in such cases, directions may be issued to join the Nodal Officer/Designated Officer of the insurance companies of a place where the accident took place. It is further urged by learned Amicus Curiae that the Claims Tribunal, police officials and the insurance companies must be sensitized by the State Judicial Academies working under the control of the High Courts with respect to the provisions of the M.V. Therefore, the trained and equipped police officers may be posted in the police stations constituting a special unit to make investigation for motor accident claim cases. The learned amicus curiae further submitted that in recording the evidence by Claims Tribunal, appointment of local commissioner as per Rule 30 of the MV Amendment Rules 2022 may also be directed, otherwise looking at the pendency of claim cases before the Tribunals, it will cause delay in disposal. iv)
The registering officer is duty bound to verify the registration of the vehicle, driving licence, fitness of vehicle, permit and other ancillary issues and submit the report in coordination to the police officer before the Claims Tribunal. Therefore, distribution memo attaching the police stations to the Claim Tribunals shall be issued by the Registrar General of the High Courts from time to time, if not already issued to ensure the compliance of the Rules. viii) On receiving FAR from the police station, the Claims Tribunal shall register such FAR as Miscellaneous Application. x)
The General Insurance Council and all insurance companies are directed to issue appropriate directions to follow the mandate of Section 149 of the M.V. xii) In case the claimant(s) or legal representative(s) of the deceased have filed separate claim petition(s) in the territorial jurisdiction of different High Courts, in the said situation, the first claim petition filed by the claimant(s)/legal representative(s) shall be maintained by the said Claims Tribunal and the subsequent claim petition(s) shall stand transferred to the Claims Tribunal where the first claim petition was filed and pending. xiv)
Case Title: GOHAR MOHAMMAD Vs. UTTAR PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION (2022 INSC 1282)
Case Number: C.A. No.-009322-009322 / 2022
