i +

Sub: Judgment dated 15'12'2022 passed bY Hon’ble Supreme Court of' India in
f
i Civil Appeal No. 9322/2022 in FAFO No. 3303/2018 titl,d „(,oha'
f,.
g. Mohammad Vs. Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation & Ors”.
(r
£'

E
E::; A coPY of the letter bearing no. 619-631/DHC/Gaz/G-2/ Judgment/2023 dated
If:
25'01.2023 received from Hon’ble High Court of Delhi2 New Delhi and a copy of
[

iii:::' Judgment dated 15-12'2022passed bY Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the subject
I}=1i
it!if matter is circulated for information and necessary compliance to : _
[

1.
-f• d a
'\\
All the Ld. Judicial Officers posted in Central District, Tis Hazari Courts> Delhi.
2. The Ld. Registrar General, Hon’ble High Court of Delhi> New Delhi for
information.
3. PS to the Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge (HQs)I Tis Hazari Courts2
Delhi for information.

The Chairman, Website Committee,Ti, Ha,a,i C,u,t,, D,lhi with th, ,,q„„st t.
direct the concerned official to upload the same on the Website of Delhi District
Courts .
5. The Director (Academics), Delhi Judicial Academy, Dwarka, New Delhi for
:4+1

information as requestedvide letter no.DJA/Dir.(Aed)/2019/4306 dated

06.08.2Q19.
6. Dealing Assistant, R&I Branch for uploading the same on LAYERS.
7. For uploading the same on CentralizedWebsite through LAYERS

)to
'IT)
Officer-in Charge, Genl. Branch, (C)
Addl. District & Sessions Judge,
Enel.: As above. Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi(b,/
 . IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
No :r =a J b n u a ry / 2 023 B

,#

From:

The RegistrarGeneral, t
I

High Court of Delhi,

NewDelhi-110003. \{?
\

To,

J'//' The Principal District & SessionsJudge (HQ), Tis Hazari Courts Complex, Delhi.
2. The Principal District & SessionsJudge (South), Saket Courts Complex, New Delhi.
3. The Principal'District & SessionsJudge (North-West), Rohini Courts Complex, Delhi.
4. The Principal District & SessionsJudge (New Delhi), Patiala House Courts Complex,
NewDelhi.
5. The Principal District & SessionsJudge (East), Karkardooma Courts Complex, Delhi.
6. The Principal District & SessionsJudge (South-East), Saket Courts complex/ Delhi-
7. The Principal District & SessionsJudge (North), Rohini Courts Complex/ Delhi.
8. The Principal District & SessionsJudge (South –West), Dwarka Courts Complex/ New
Delhi
9. The Principal District & SessionsJudge-cum-Special Judge (PC Act> (CBI>/ RACC/ New
Delhi
10. The Principal District & Sessions Judge (Shahdara), Karkardooma Courts Complex/
Delhi
11. The Principal District & Sessions Judge (North-East), Karkardooma Courts Complex/
Delhi
12. The Principal District & SessionsJudge (West), Tis Hazari Courts Complex, Delhi.
13. The Principal Judge (HQ), Family Courts, Dwarka, New Delhi.

sub: Judgement dated 15.12.2022 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal
No. 9322/2022 in FAFONo, 3303/2018 titled “Gohar MohammadVs. Uttar Pradesh
State RoadTransport Corporation & Ors.

Sir/ Madam, _

I am directed to request you to kindly downloadthe Judgement dated 15.12.2022

passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 9322 of 2022 in FAFONo.
3303/2018 titled “Gohar Mohammad Vs. Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation &
Ors” from the official website of Supreme Court of India and circulate the same amongst all the
Judicial Officers working under your respectivecontrol for information and necessarY
compliance.

Yours faithfully,

G'67/7' gR ,

(S.S Bhatnagar)
Joint Registrar(Gazette-IB)
for Registrar General

FIg@fJ
 /

c -#: Ar I
a)

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

emil APPELLATE JURISDICTION
crvil APPEAL NO.9322 OF 2022
[ARISING OUT OF SPECUIL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 32448 OF 2018]

(;ohar IVloharnnred . . .Appellant

Versus

Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

& others . . .Respondent(s)

JUDGMENT

J.K. Maheshwari, J.

Leave granted .

2. The instant appeal has been filed ass.ail.ing- the final

order dated 06.09.2018 $assed by the High Court of

Allahabadin First Appeal from Order No. 3303 of 20181 vide

which the appeal preferred by the appellant against th-e

award dated 04.05.2018 passed by the Motor Accident

gf@ Claims Tribunal (for short 'MACT') in MACP No. 1107 of 2012

has been dismissed. MACT allowed the claim petition' and

1
e) B-q\
I

awarded a compensation of Rs. 31.90,000/- (Thirty-one lacs

and ninety thousand only) in favour of respondent Nos. 6, 7

and 8 (legal representatives of deceased and hereinafter

referred to as 'claimants’) to be pdd by respondent No. 5

Clnsurance- Colnpany), with further direction to recover the

same from appellant (hereinafter referred as owner) who was

saddled with liability.

3. Facts briefly put are that, on the date of accident, i.e.,

29.07.2012, the deceased was 24 years old and working as

Managing Director at DRV Drinks Pvt. Ltd. While he was

returning from factory to residence, his car was hit from

behind bY a bus owned by appellant on the by-pass road

near Sanhwali village (U.P.). The deceased sustained severe

injuries and died on the way to hospital. 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 MAC:T seeking compensation of Rs. 4,19,OO,000/-

(Four crores and nineteen laos only) under various heads.

4. The MACT vide order ' dated 04.05.2Q18, allowed the

claim petition and awarded a total sum of Rs. 31,90,000/-

2
 W.
'b
\ /

alonWth 7% int””t. Wt,iI, ,;.„,pun„g the loss of

dependency. the annual income of the deceased was
accepted as Rs. 3,09,660/- after making deduction towards

personal expenses, multiplier of 18 was applied. It WdS held

that the vehicle was not being operated as per the terms of

pennlt and was in violation of terms and condiUons of

lrlstlrance policy, therefore the owner of the offending vehicle

was held liable to pay compensation.

5' Appellant filed appeal before the High Court assaihng

the issue of liabilitY cbntending,inter alia, no violation of

guidelines as such was there and submitted that the

offending vehicle was insured with insurance company

indemni@ng the liabHitY' Appellant further contendedthat

he had Special Temporary Authorization (in short 'peI.Hat)) to

operate the bus on the route for which the fee was paid. The

High Court ade impugned order affirmed the findings of

MACT and held that the vehicle owner failed to produce the

or®nal permit and also could not get the same proved

calling the person from the Transport Department, in

absence’ the Claims TTibunal aghtIY decided the issue of

liability against the owner

3
a ,1 r

6. Challenging the concurrent findings of the Courts

below, the appellant contested the instant appeal largely on

the ground that failure Eo produce the original permit cannot

lead to an inference against him, especidllv when such

pennit has been duIY issued bY Transport Authority and

confirmed in the repIY under Right to Information Act (for

short 'RTI Act’). It was further contendedthat 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.

7. Per contra, the State as well as Insurance Company

mainly relied on the findings recorded by the Courts below

to contend that the offending vehicle was not being plied as

per the terrns and conditions of the pernrit and also in

violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy.

It has further been contendedthat the offending vehicle

stood withdrawn from State transport services way back in

4
 \a'
.L

2009 and was no more under the control of respondent No

1' hence, the issue of habj]ity has HghUV been decided

8' Having heard learned counsel for the parties and bn

perusal of the materIal available on record, it clearly reveals

that on the date of accident, the appellant did not have a

valid and effective permit to Ply the offending vehicle on the

r 10 L1 e ILIINyrH][][• er e C idLe
IIa1p1(1FFHBII ent took place n Having e Mens iV ely gone

through the fact-finding exercise, it is categorically recorded

by MACT that the appellant was neither dt)le to

produce/prove the original permit nor was able to prove the

i H][JL1C)r H][][][q1a1p][HHhHi
1C)H][ILreceived under RTI Act p Even if RTlink ]nd on

IS considered by which it is not clear as to when the disputed

permIt was issued and by whom. The alleged permit was

ISsued on 28'07'2012’ i'e'’ on Saturday and no explanation

IS on record as to why deposit of fee was asked on the next

a1by i • e • \S U 1C][ 11cIL) 7+

H][up•][H H]D/lore over ) assuming that permit Wd S valid

as per letter of Transport Authority, but it does not of any

help to the appellant since the vehicle was being plied on a

roLI e different than specified in permit. The appellant has

failed to give any explanationto refute the obsetvdUons made

by MACT to Ply the vehicle on Roorkee by_pass to Handwar

5
via Meerut which did not fall within the route of permit
issued by Transport Authority, The said findings of fact have

been affirmed by the High Court by the impugned order.

9. After going through the record, the concurrent

findings of fact do not warrant any interference since they do

not outrageously defy the logic as to guffer from the vice of

irrationality and neither incur the blame of being perverse. In

view of foregoing discussion,we are of the consideredopinion

that the arguments raised by appellant are bereft of any

merit, hence this appeal is hereby dismissed.

10. During the course of hearing of the appeal. Ms. Rani

C'hhabra, Mr. Sameer Abhyankar, Ms. Sakshi Kakkar and

Mr. Vivek Gupta, learned counsel for the parties have

expressed concern regarding delaY in disposal of the claims

cases in trial court or at appellate stage. Emphasis has been

made to the 'objects and Reasons’ of Motor Vehicles

Amendment Act, 2019 (for short “M.V. Amendment Act”)

which is a benevolentlegislationbrought with an intent to

compensate the family of the deceased and the persons

suffered with injuries including permanent disabilitY as

6
 L
I f

expeditiouslyas possible. It is said the mandate of the

provisions of the M. V. Jbnendment Act, Rules and recourse

as specified have not been followed by the stakeholders

including Claims Tribunals working under subordination of

different High Courts.

ll' it is urged, the legislationto pay compensationin

monetary terms for damages to person or property cannot

put the claimant into his original position. wbat may be the

adequate amount for a wrongful act b an eM,reme task. The

pament of compensation in a case of death or for damage to

the bodY in a motor accident claim may be based on

'arithmeUcal calculation. How far it is just and reasonableis

a matter of satisfaction of the Court by adopting a un.dorm

approach. 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. Therefore in assessing the compensation

uniformity and reasonabihty are required to be followed. In

such cases, dispensationof justice may cause social impact

and maY delaY paWent of compensation. Therefore

direction to follow the mandate of law at the earliest may be
7
g) . fI

issued.

12. To advert the said issue, the assistance of learned

Senior Counsel Mr. S. Nagamuthu,Mr. C.A. Sundaram,Mr.

A.N. Venugopala Gow(la and learned counsel Mr. A.N.

Krishna Swam}r was sought as amici curiae including Ms.

GaMma Prashad, Additional Advocate General for State of

U.P. They have rendered their assistance being officers of the

Court irrtrtie bense and spirit which we acknowledge.

13. Learned counsel for the parties and learned amici

curiae have mainly advanced their arguments v,4th respect to

M.V. AmendmentAct in particular Chapter XI thereof, inter

alia, emphasizing the importanceof Sections 146, 149, 159,

160, 161, 164, 166 of the M.V. AmendmentAct. It is urged

that the Motor Vehicles (Fifth Amendment) . Rules, 2022 (for

short “M.V. AmendmentRules”) have also been brought into

force w.e.f. 1.4.2022 after the M.V. AmendmentAct. 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

8
 t+
\ r

implementationwas negligible. But, now by amendment,a

statut01TY regime is prescribed which is not being followed in

most of the High Courts and by subordinate courts though it

is required to be followed strictly. However, appropriate

directions are required to implement the regime of M.. V.
AmendmentAct and Rules. In alternative, the hurdle in

implementation of the directions by Joining the stake_

holders maY be directed as deemed fit. In support of these

content:ions, recourse as taken by the Delhi High Court as

well as this Court in the case of 'Rajesh Tqagi & Or's. vs.

Jaibir Singh & Ors. , 2009 sec Online Del 4306' (for short

Rajesh Tyagi I”), 'Jai Prakash Vs. National Insurance

Co . Ltd. & Ors. , (20 1 O) 2 SCC 607’ (for short “Jai Prakash

I”), 'Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh ,&..,Ors . , 2014

SCC OnLine Del 7626’ (for short “Rajesh Tyagi II”),

'Rajesh TBagi & Ors . Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors . , 201 7 SCC

Online Del 4306’ (for short “Rajesh Tyagi III”) have been

relied upon, -in addition to refer the provisions of M.V.

amendment Act and Rules

9
al \{
t

14' After having heard learned counsels. we deem it

necessa1IY ta' trace the history as to how the M. V. Amendment

Act and M'V' AmendmentRules have been brought into force

to set UP new regime to deal wim the claim cases since the
time of accident.

\sJLvis_a_vis 20 1 9
Amendment –

15' in this regaTd’ the distinguished attempt to address

the ensuing concerns was made by the Delhi High Court in

Rajesh TYagi I Csupra). In the said case, the Court while

dealing with the question of effective implementation of Delhi

MotoF Accident Claims Tribunal Rules, 2008 and SectIon

158(6) of - M'V' Act (pre-2019 amendment) directed the

Station House Officers to submit 'accident informaUon report,

to MACT within 30 daYS of accident and said report be

treated as claim petition by MACT for the purpose of inquily.

Suggestions were invited and later a committee was

constituted to find out a mechanism for time bound
settlement of motor accident claim cases. After deliberations

10

f
1? (A.
f

from all stakeholders, the committee submitted a draft of

agreed procedure’ and consequently \,’ide order dated

16. 12.2009, the Delhi High Court formulated' “Claims

Trtbunal Agreed Procedure”(for short 'CTAP’) for time bound

settlement of motor accident claims within 90 to 120 days

and directed its implementationonly for trial as pilot project

for a period of six months from 15.01.2010 to 14.07.2010.

The CTAP in addition to Section 158(6), in a nutshell

provided as follows –

1. Mandatory intimation ojjacturn oj the accident

by InvestigatingOfIner to the Claims Tribunal
uiithin 48 hours of the acctcient and a
haormation about . insurance compcuuy ts
ctvcakrbte by that time, then inUrrLctUorl to the
concerned insurance company by emcat:
2. Appointment of designate(ioacer by ' tait[fdnce
company for each case imme(iiateLy upon .
receipt of intimation;
3.
coaecRon of reLevant evidence by inves&gctang
Oacer reLating to acckiertt as u>eU as
compmrtion oj compensation (photographs ,
procf of age, proc)j of income of decectse<! etc.) ;
4 DetaiLed Accicient Report (DM) to be yiLed by
InvestigatingOfner before Claims tribunal
within SO clays of the accictent and a copy
thereof to the concerned insurance con Ipang ;

11
e tI

5. Copy oy DAR cttongwit}\ documents to be

submitted to l£gat Services Authority ',

6. Dbcretton of the Claims Tribunal on appLication

made yor extension aj time in cases where the
Investigating OIIner is unable to compLete the
invest{gatton within 3G clays for reasons beyond
his controL;
7. Production oj drIver, ou>ner, ckRmctnt ctr\ci eye-
u>{tnesses bejore Claims Tribunal cttongu>ith
DAR:
8. Furnishingof report by concenreci Registration
Atitf6rtty irt Form-D oj DeLhi Motor Accident
CLcarrts TrIbunal Rules' 2008 to the PoLice and
CkriwwTRbunctt within 15 days from the receipt
of request;
9. Examination oj DAR by the CLaims Tribunal as
to uj}tether the DAR is coTnptete in all respects or
not;
10. Treatment oj DAR /led by Investigating CWce1
as claim petition urtcier Section 166t4) oJ Motol
VehicLes Act (pre 2019 AmencimeTIV:
11. Grant oy 30 days’ time to Insurance Company
by Cta'tins Tribunal to exawtne the DAR and to
take a decision as to quantum of compensctM)n=
1 2. Assessment oy cornperLsation by ctesignctted
oyBeer a.ccompcudeci with reasoned order which
shaLI constitute a legal ojfer to the cLaimants
CtTtCi iTt case, when such ofer is acceptabLe to
the cta{marLt,CLaims Tribunal to pass a consent
(rIvard uRttta jurttwr 30 clays’ time jor the
insurance company to deposit the amotvlt:

12
If
f
Wi
13. Time period of not more than 30 claUs’ to be
granted by Claims Tribunal to cta_bnant to
respond to offer made by insurance COTnpCUty;
1 4. Conduct of enquiry by Claims Tribunal under
Section 168 and 169 (pre 20 1 9 Amendment)
and passing of au)cnet within 30 d'CLyS’ in case
Qf non-acceptance of oJfer by ctairnartt given by
tnsLLrance corrLpoLrLy ;
15. Computation of compensationpayable to the
Legal representatives of deceased victims to be
done by Cl.aims Tribunal in accordance with the
principLes Laid (lou>n by Hon. Supreme Court in
'Sarta Verma Vs. DTC, 2009 (6) SCALE 129’ ;
1 6.
MinkTtum u;age to 'be conside'red ' bu Claims
Tribunal in cases where Legal represeiltatbesoy
the deceased cio not have ciocuTnenta,ry
evidence as to proof of income cd deceased;
1 7.
ConsicieraHon of principles laid ciotvn by Delhi
High Court in 'National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.
Farzana, MAC. APP.13/ 2007’ in case oj death
o/ a child.

16. The High Court also directed the Delhi Police to

prepare 'Accident InvestigationManual” for implementation

of the CTAP. In the output, it revolutionized the Motor
Accident Compensation Scheme due . to which the

13
3) r

claimmlt(s) received the compensation within 120 daYS of the

accident .

17. Another notable effort was made by this Court in 'Jai

Prakash I’ (supra) 9 wherein ths Court identified majorly four

issues i.e., ytrsttg, grant of compensation in cases of 'hit and

nln where the vehicles remain . unidentified which do not

have insurance cover having third paltY insurance but

carrying persons not covered by the insurance’; secondIY,

'widespread practice of using goods vehicles for passenge1

trac’; thirdly , 'procedural delays in adjudication of claims

by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and following hardships

to the victims; and yourth'Ly , 'the full amount of

compensation not reaching the victims, particularIY to those

who me uneducated’. Having regard to the nature of subject

matter and consideringthe suggestionsmade bY amicus.

\,ide order dated 17.12.2009 guidelines/directions were

issued by this Court to be carTied out in three stages, the

same are reproduced in brief as under:–

Directions to PoLice Authorities

I . Director General oj PoLice for each State is
directed to instruct ctU PoLice Stations in the

14
 q?J: i

State to compLy with provisions ca Section

158C6) of Motor VehicLes Act (pre 2019
Amenc#rent) arId submit Accident in,formauon
Report in Form no. 54 accornparaedwith
copies oj First Irgownation Report, site
sketch/ mahazar / photographs , insurance
poLicy, etc. to the jurisdictional MAC'T and
irIS LLrarLce cornpoLny LV ithin 30 cLays oJ
reqtstration of FIR;
Directions to Claims TribunaLs
1. Registrar General of each High Court is
(itrecte(i to instruct aLL CLaims Tribunal in his
State to register the reports of accidents
received under Section 158(6) of the Act and
deal with them without waiting for ftkTW cg
ctctim petition. Further, Registrar General shaLI
ensure that necessary registers, /owns ctncl
other support is extended to the Tribunal;
2, Tllbtmat shaLI maintain an Instautiort Register

Jor recorcttngAccident Irgbrmattolr Reports

received from Station House Officers and
register them as misceLLaneous peaaons.
Tribunal shaLI further j& ct date of preLhnatany
heaIIng and ajter appearance ca ckRmants, it
shan be converted into cLaim pehtiort;
3. Tribunal shall satisfy itself that the Accident
Information Report relates to a real accident
and is not a resuLt of any coLlusion or
jabrtcation;
4 In case oJ non-dispute of LiabiLity by ktsurctrtce
company, TRbunca shaLt make an endeavor to
determine the compensctaonamourtt by
SLmrnoFy encluiry or reJer the matter to II)k

15
 AdakLtforsetaemeraand chspose-Q[fthe claim
petUionkseVu>ithirl QamefcLmenotexceeciktg_
-s& miTtthS }om the date oj registration oj
ckrim petttbru,
Tribunal shaLL direct insurance companY to

deposit the cuiwatted amount or the amount

determ{.TIed, tuith CIa tIm Tribunal within 30

days dy(ietenTtnatiOn;
restiorts for Insurance Companies

in case oy de(lthanct non-dispute Qf LictbititY bY

insurance company, endeavor shaLL be made
i;i; iisurance companYto paY compensatIOnaf
per stcmdcud jormukt to the Jantt-g Regal
-repl.esentatives) cd deceased without u)eating
for decIsion oj 7}{bunat or settlement by Lok
AdaZat;

In, case of kyuries and non-ciisputeojkcd3mY

by #tsurcLnce company , the #LSwer shouLd ofa.
treatTnera at its cost to the trgured u)ithout
UDatting joT CLUJarci cJ the TTibuncLt:

To protect and pFesen)e the coml9ensatton

amount au)arded. taB-maKes, special schemes
in consu_Ltation tDtth Naaonatked Banks ctrtci
bye Insurance Corporcdion oJ India mczY be
£nstdered by the insuf.'zrtce cornpctntes under
which the compensation kept Bed is in
deposit yor an appropf,cae period card-interest
is paRt by Bank on monthLYba-siSI
Insurance comp,.1,tbsmay also considel
cgfertrtg aTtnuKy kLstea(i oj Lump stan
compens(.ltion and prepare an annuity scheme
with irLUotVeTnent oi nje inswance CGTPOFCam1

oj India.
16
 U?)
\

'estions for Legislative/Executa>eirLteruertttort

1. FormuLation of more comprehensive scheme
ensufklg payment of compensationto aLI

accicient Dicams of road ctcc{.cients:

2. Introduction of hybrid model wha'h involves
coLLectionof f&qd kfetbne premium hI regard
to each vehicLe pLus bnposiuor\ ca a road
accident cess which may provide more
sattsJactory solution in vast country like
India;
3. DefIne 'third party’ to cover any acckient
victim other than the ou>ner and increase the
pren tia, i/ necessary ;
4. Consider rationaUzcttion of Second ScheduLe

to the Act and increase the quantum cy

con\pensclhon payabLe under Section 161 ca
the Act in case oj hit and run motor acckients;
5. See:ure compensation to the DictirrLS of road

accidents involving uninsured vehicLes by

d&ect#tg the owner of vehicle to offer security
or deposit an amount adequate to saasyy the
cm;cnd as a condition precedent for, reteQse oy
seized vehicLe.

18. With the advent of time, the suggestions and guidelines

issued bY Courts were adopted and implemented by the

authorities. Progress reports were filed by stakeholders at

regular intervals for consideration of court. Similar'171 in

furtherance of the directions given by Delhi High Court in

17
 Rajesh Tyagi I (supra), the CTAP was implemented in the

territoIY of Delhi and certain lacunae were identified in its

practical implementation. Meetings were convened involving

all the stakeholders and further suggestionswere presented

before Court for incorporationin order to make the guidelines

more efficient. The . suggestionswere duly considered, and

Delhi High Court ade order dated 12.12.2014 in ' Rajesh

FaX

TYagi II’ tsupraJ incorporated the suggestions and appended

the modified Claims Tribunal Agreed Procedure to be

implemented with effect from 01,02.2015 for a period of sjx

months subject to review after expiry of three months.

Following is the gist of rnodi6catior,sas carried out and

approved by Delhi High Court : -

1. InHmctaon oj the accident by the Inuestigating

C)acer has to be in Form I oy the rnod©ed
procedure (CLause 2) ;

2. List oJ documents to be coLLected by

Investigating CWu:er is given under Clause 3;
3. DetaiLed Accident Report (DAR) to be yi,Led by
Imestigating C)acer shaLI be in Forrrt II oy the
rnoei©eciproceclure;

4. Duty o/ Investigating Ojficer to seek directions

IronI Claims Tribunal in Part X o/ Form II ca
DWI m event of fCLaure #

18
\

(irtver/cLaimant/ ou>ner/ insurance compa,ny

to discLose relevant injormation crnci produce
ciocurnents before Investigating C8jtcer u>itfUn
15 days i
5. Duty oJ insurance corRpanks to get DAR
uergteci by their surueyor within 20 cIa_US oy
the receipt of copy of DAR (Clause 20);
6. Report oJ the Designated Officer oy {rtsurance
company shaLI be in Form III oy mochjtecl
procedure (CLause 21);
7. Duty cfCkRms Tribunal to eLicit the truth and
saasjy itself that the statements made in DAR
are true before passing the atvctrci (CIa,lne
24)
8. Duty oj the Claims Tribunal to examine the
cLcaTnctntsbefore passing the aboard to
ascertcaT\ their fULanciat condition, prooj oj
residence etc. (CLause 26) ;
9. A4ctnner of deposit of aboard arrLOUTtt to be
specyte(i by CLaims Tribunal (Clause 27);

10. CLaims Tribunal to pass an appropNctte order

Jor protection of ctuictrci amount (CLause,28),;
II. Ctcttms Tribunal shaLL deal to uk the
co{npa(mce of provisions in au>ard {CLause
29) i
1 2.
Ctcams Tribunal shall Px a ctcIte yor reporting
compLiance (Clause 30);

13. CoPY oJ DAR as u)eU as award to be sent to

concerned Magistrate {Clause 31) ;
14 Record oJ au;ard passed by CtairrLS Tribunal
shaLt be maintained in Form v (CIa_use 33);

19
0. J}

19' The aforesaid modified procedure was given a seal of

affirmationby this Court ade order dated 13.05.2016 passed

"= Jat P'ak-sh 1 tsupra). wha, ,-,a,wi.g th, p,.g'„,

made with respect to legislative changes that were suggested

by previous order dated 17.12.2009. The modified procedure

approved bY Delhi High Court was brought on record and

after perusal, this Court obselved as follows:

'We have aLso penned the ptocedure, u>hicl1 has been

pLcLcectbejore us as An„,xu,e R5 with th, ',SP.ns,
whicit in ouf view, appears to be a comprehensiueone
and ava we can issue jUfther directions to the Registrar
General oJthe DeLhi High CDU,t to ,„s,„., th,'t p„;c.,du,e
is stHcttY foLlowed insc)Jar as DeLhi is concerned and
also ckcukae the said procedure to all the other High
COUTtS and the RegbtTar General of an the other High
Courts are directed to ensure that the said procedure ts
hnpternented through the Motor Accident CIa_bTn
Tfibunat in coordination with the Legal Selv k..e
Authoaaes as weLI as the Director General Qf PoLice o /
the Statesconcerned.’

SubsequentIY,this Court ade order dated 06.11.2017

modified its earlier order dated 13.05.2016 and directed an

States to implement the 'Modined CTAP’ while observing as

follows –

The Ofdef dated 13.OS.2016 tutU therein'e stand

modWed to the extent that Justice Mid.ha has hirnsea
nlod©ed his earLier order on 12'" December. 2014. The
RegistfY wiLt send a coPY of this order as wea as the

20
IN

OTcieF passed bY Justice Midha on 12th December, 2014

fo the Registrar General oy each High Court jor
necesscLry iraorrnationartci cornphartce. Ltst the rTu-ltter
on 23’d January. 20 18.'

20. In pursuanceof the irnplementaUon of the guidelines,

the proceedingsin Rajesh Tyagi I (supra) continl-led 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. However, effectIve

implementation of the modified procedure remained a

persistent roadblock at all levels, especialIY in terms of the

directions given by this Court ade order dated 13.05.2016

and 06.11.2017 in Jai PrakCBh I (supra). The said concern

again came for consideration before this Court in 'M.R.

Krishna Mur thi Vs. The New India Assurattce Co. Ltd. ,

2019 SCC OnLine SC 315’, wherein, adP order dated

05.03.2019, this Court categorically noted that there was no

effective implementation of modified CTAP by Claim

Tribunals at all India level. Taking note of the aforesaid1 this

Court directed National Legal Services AuthoHty to take up

the matter and monitor the same in co-6rdih'ati6nand rd-

21
operation with various High Courts. Further, directions were

also gi\en to State Judicial Academies to sensitize the

Presiding Officers of Claim Tribunals, senior ponce ofncials

and insurance companies for Implementation of modified

(;TAP. LastIY, this Court also directed the C1,tim Tribunals

pan India to - implement 'Mo}or Accident Claims Annuity

Deposit Scheme’ (for short 'MACAD Scheme') as formulated

bY Delhf'FiighCourt in Rajesh TYagi la Csupr a). The relevant

paragraphs are being reproduced below for ready reference _

“32. Notuitthstanding the caoresc,u ADR methods

cr£YucKcatory process b+ore the MACTs b
inLdLispensabte. There ccLrLrLot be a g LLcu'cuUee that
IC)0% cases would be settled through nlecXation or
Lok Adcaat' b_Erc a
c h
feasonabte penloci. The Delhi High Court has a£ven
Faw tudqments provt:brIg for mechartsm to speed u

the disposal of such cases and to ensure hca

schemes are settLed_ujttIUn a period or qC)/ 120 Ms
'tom the date of accident.In nutshell. these
directions {rLctucie that on the occurrence of accident.
the police u)hictt comes into the picture in the firs,
instance. should compLete the {nuestiqcltion and
along with BLing of FIR before the concerned Court o
vletTopohtan Magistrate. copies are sent to MAC'T £u
weLL as Insurance Colnpa.MIMo. Insurance

'Ut as tO u)hether the CZaint iS p<luo_bt,Dclnci Uj{thiTt

IO days it should respond to MAm and once an
W £m
22
I W/
evidence etc.. as well, it ZVOLtZd' enable the MAC'T to
decide the case within 3D dar/s. . . . ...
33. Vale order dated 06th November, 2017 in yat
Ppakash Case. this Coun rnodyied its order dated
13th May. 2016 and directed an States to impLement

20 14' The copy of the Mo£ay%d CLaims Tribunal

Agteea Procedure was directed to be cu'cuLated to
the Registrar General of ecch HQ tt Coun, necessaTy
jot compLiance. . . . . . .
34. This needs to be ,followed at aLLIndia let>el NALSA
shot&c! take up and monitor the same m well in
coofa£natioIZ and coopercttk)n with various High
Courts to faciLitatethe same.
XXX XXX XXX

37. TtltLS. (Xrect ion for impterner\taHort of the 'c'la{rru

TNbunat Agreed Procedure’uIlich is substituted bt.
rnodified procedure. cts noted aboue. are carea.du
M.. However,we M that there is no Proper
bn,)temeraattort thereof by the Ckanu Tribuna_k
We, thus. direct that there should be proq1 Ih {sic)
'or7z £tr7te to time, in ati State Judicial Acct(lerTaes to

r•+ Ra
•

bnptementation oT-=:i;=edixe.

21. Based on the guidelines issued by this Court and Delhi

High Court, recommendations were made by Group of

Transport Ministers (Gown of States alongwith other

stakeholders. The Central c,overnnrent with an obJective to

improve road safetY, facilitate citizens in their dealings with

tFansport departments, s.trengthen rural tr,ulsport1 public

23
e. I

transport, last mile connectivitythrough automation,

computerization and online services’ introduced 'The Motor

Vehicles (Amendment) BUt 1 2019’. The afOTesaid Bill was

passed bY both the Houses as 'The Motor Vehicles Act ,

1988 (59 o/ 1988).

22. Vide new Amendment,'Chapter X’ of the preceding

Act was omitted. 'Chapter XI – InsuFance ca MotoF

Vehicles against third party risks’ and Chapter XII
Claims Tribunals were allIended as per the Motor Vehicle

Amendment Act, 2019 which came into force w.e.f. 1'4-2022'

For the purpose of this case, \ve are mainIY concealed with

Chapters xi and xii of the AmendmentAct and the Rules to

emphasize the necessity of insurance, duties specified to the

ponce officer, registeringauthority, insurance companies and

C'IaIn Tribunals to determine compensation'

Necessity of Insurance of the vehicle:

23. By vIrtue of an amendment made in Section 146'

murance of Motor vehicle is made necessarY. The said

Section is relevant, therefore reproduced as under:

24
 I W=y;
\
A

146.' Necessityfor insurance against thUd party ds}c.

[ 1) No personshaLL use, except as a passenger. or cause or

cdtotv anY other person to use, a motor uehicte in a pubLic
pLace, unLess there is in force in rela.tion to the use cd th
vehicLe bY that person or that other person. cu the cctse
TRaY be, a policy oJ insurance uJah the requiTerrLerLts oj this
Chapter:
jPFOVi(ieci that in the case oJ a vehicLe carry ing, or rnecutt
to ccmtY, dangerous or hcucvcious goods, there shaLL also
be a poLicy oJ insurance under the Public HabitiQ
Insurance Act, 1991 {6 oy 1991).]

ExTkmatior\. –A person dRuing a motor vehicLe mereLy as

a paid enlpkyjee, u)hUe there is in force in relation to the
use of -the vehicLe no such poLicy as is required by this sub_
section, shan not be cteerned to act in corlfrctve11r ion cg the
sub-sectionunless he knows or has reason to believe that
there is no such poLicy inforce.
(2) Sub-section £l J shaLL not appLy to any vehicLe ou>rtecl by
the Central Govemrrtera or a State Governmertt ara used
JoT Gouernment purposes UILCorLILectedLV ah any
cornrnerctcLt enterprise.
Ca The appropriateGovernment may, by order, exempt
tom the operation of sub-section (1) any vehicle ou>ned by
any oJ the fbLt'9u>ing authorities, nameLy :–

[cD theCentral Government or a State Gouerr\ment, ty

the ue lack is used for (,ouerrtmelr[ purposes
connectedwHl any commerckLL enterprise:
(b) any local authority:
(c) any State transport undertaking:

Pfovkieci that no such order shall be made in relation to

any such authority unLess a jund has been estabLished
anti is maintained by that authority in accorMnce with
I the ruLes made in that behaa under this Act jcr meeting
clay LiabiLity arising out oj the tse ca any vehicleoy that
authority which that authority or any person in its
empLoYmentm-ay incur to thb'd parties.

Exptctnctaon. –For the purposes oy- this sub_section

'appPopllcaeGo vemrtlerzt ” means the Central *Gou'e}n}Tibrit
or a State Government as the casa ntcry be, anti

25
 a> in relation to any corporation or company ou>ned by the
Central Government or any State Government, means the
Central Governmentor that State Gouemnrent:
(iD in relation to any corporation or company OlvlrecZby the
Central Government and one or more State Gouernrnertts,
means the Central Gouerrimertt:
M) in relation to any other State transport urtciertcLktrlgor
any Local authority , means that Government u)hich has
control over that undertakIng or authority .

24. On perusing the M.V. AmendmentAcl, in particular

Section 146 of Chapter XI, it is clear that a motor vehicle

cannot ply on public place nor is allowed to be used at the

public place .unless insured. The exemption from insurance

has been prescribed to the vehicles owned by the Central

Government, State Government, local authority or any State

Transport Undertaking,if the vehicle is used for the purpose

not connected with any commercial enterprise. Exemptions

specified in sub-section (2) are subject to the orders of the

appropriate Government. As per the said provisions, the

rigor of sub-section (1) would not apply to the vehicles

owned by the authorities specified in sub-section(3) (a) to (c)

subject to establishment of the fund and its maintenance by

such authority, as may be prescribed by appropriate

C;ovenirhent. Thus, exemptions permitted to the class and

category of the vehicles of the Central Governrnent and State

26
t
§yJ

Government are only subject to the order of the appropriate

Government on establishing mld maintaining fund by such

authority. The appropriate Government has also been

defined for the purpose of vehicles of local authorities and

State Transport Undertakings.

25. The limits of the liability of the insurance have been

prescribedunder Section 147 and in terms of the policy so

issued under the provisions of the M. V. Anrendment Act.

Section 147 is reproduced thus:

147 : Requirements of poLicies and Units oy LiabiLity . –

iII in order to compLy with the requtremenb oy’ this

Chapter, a poLicY oJ tnsurance must be a poLicy LOTrich–

(cD is issued by a person who is an authorised insurer:

and

(bi insures the person or cLasses oy persons specaied in

the poLicy to the extent specified in sub-section (2)–
(Vagainst any liabiLity which may be incurred by- him in
respect ca the death oJ or bc)chIU27 {tryury to any person,
including owner o/ the goods or his authorised
representative carReci in the vehicle] or ciamage to any
pfopertY oJ a third party caused by or ctrtsing out oy the
use Qj-the uehicLe in a pubLic place:

(iV against the death oJ or bodiLy ayuB to ctrty passenger

oJ a pubLic service vehicLe caused by or arising out oy the
use Qf the vehicLe in a pubLic place;

Prouided that a poLicy shall not be required_

tD to cover UabtMy in respect ca the cteattt, afb ing out of

and in the course oJ’ his empLoyment,Of the employed'oy a
person insured by the poLicy or in respect oy’ bocli.Ly injury

27
 (CO engaged in driving the vehicLe or

t[i/E: :7 IL : :T?itce = ===nEe;Z)::t = ? :: :Z=qv:: iT;=d=c to r q r

(c) git is a goods carriage, being CCL-Fied in the vehicLe or

CiDto cover any contractuca kabiLay.

:c=c=ee=ls pFOutded in ct“use fbI. th' “„„„,,t qf h„bUty

P}{ { :rte:Jp==! !!!!:::LE:::Z =f:n]c=L:I? P rO P e rQ o\ th 1CILth M partHq

28
l

prescribed matters; and (ia'ferent forms. pctrticuklrs arId

matters may be prescribed in d©erent cases.
[4 J Where a cover note issued by the insurer under the
provisions oi this Chapter OF the IULes made a\ereurl(leT
is not foLlowedby a policy oj insurance Luithin the
prescribed time. the insurer shalt. within set>en days oJ
the expiry oi the period of the vaLidity oy the couer note,
nc)tay the /act to the registering authority in whose
records the Dehicte to u>FItch the cover note reLates }un
been registered or to such other authority as the State
Government may prescribe.

€5) Notu>ithstan(ling anything corttairted in any Into yor

the arne being in force, an insurer bsuing a policy oj
insurance L£ncier this section shaLI be LiabLe to tndenuajy
the person or cLasses of persons spec{Redin the policy in
respect of anY liability which the poLicy purports to cover
in the case cd that person or those cLasses oy- persons.

The aforesaid provision specifies what may be the

requirements of the insurmlce policies and on having

insurance, limits of liability to pay compensation to the

claimants.

ACTION BY POLICE OFFICERS AND REGISTErRI.NG

AUTHORITIES IN THE EVENT OF OCCURRENCE OF
ACCIDENTBY USE OF MOTOR VEHICLE AT PUBLIC
PLACE:

26. While foljowing the procedure, where an accident has

taken place’ infoTmaUon regarding accident is required to be

fUFnished to the police officer. The relevant prdvisiong ixdth

29
@.
I

aspect to the information and duties of the police officer and

registeringauthority have been specified under Secaons 159

md 160 of the M. V. AmendmentAct, which are reproduced

as thus:

" 159. Injor'mation to be given regardingaccictent.–The

police of{cet shall, (luring the investigation, prepare
an accident iraorrnationreport to faciLitate the
settLementof ciaim in such jorIn and manner. u;talkI
three months and containingsuch particuLars and
submit the same to the Ctatms Tribtulat and such
other agency as may be prescribed.

160. A registering authority or the o#cef-in-chargeoJ a

police st(abn shaLL iI so required by a person who
aLLeges that he is entitLed to claim conrpensQLttOn tn
respect oj an accident artsing out oJ' Ure use oj- a
motor Deft(.'leg or if so required by an insurer aga ins
E

LVrZOma cta£rrt has been made in respect oJ any motoF

ve}ucte1 yurnts tt to that person or to that insurer, as
the case may be. on payment oJ the prescribed jee,
any irtjormcdbn at the dbposat of the said authority
or the said police ojRcer reLating to the kien®ccLttOn
marks and other particuLars of the uehicte and the
name arrci address c$ the person LUhO was using the
vehicLe at the time Qf the accident or was injured bY it
and the propelty. if any. dawrged in such ,fonY' and
within such time as the Cent7ctt Gouermnertt maY
11

prescribe.

27. From the above, it is evident that on receiving the

kltimation of the accideht and dUring investigationlthe police

ofheef is required to prepare the accident informaUDn report

30
 t
\:_y:
\

CAIR) and shall work as a facilitator in se{llerhentof the

claim in a manner as prescribed and furnish the irformation

to the Claims Tribunal and other stakeholders, as specified.

The police officer and tegistering authority are supposed to

discharge their functions to facilitate and furnish the

information on payment of prescribedfees to the person

entitled for compensationor to insurer1 against whom the

claim has been made. They shall also facilitate to identify

the vehicle, name and address of the person using the vehicle

at the time of accident and also regarding a person injured or

property involved, as prescribed.

28. The Central Government in its wisdom with ' an intent

tO carry out the purpose of the Act promulgatedthe Rtlles1

known as Motor Vehicle Amendment Rules, 2022. ~-1

29. As per the Rules, in the event of a road accident1 the

lnvestigation must be started immediately on receipt'; df

information by the police of6cer of the police . station

concerned.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

31
 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' in a case of injury, the Investigating

Officer shall take photographs of the injured in the h.,)spita1

and shall conduct spot enquiry examining the

eYewitnesses/bYstanders. The intimation regarding the
accident is required to be furnished by InvestigatingOfficer

within 48'’hours to the Claims Tribunal in the shape of First

Accident Report tEAR) in Form-’I. It is further required to be

pent to the Nodal Officer of the insurance company on having

particulars of the insurance policy. The injured/victim(s),

legal representativeCs), State Legal Services Authority, insurer

shall also be provided the,copy of Form-1 and the same must

be uploaded on the website of the State Police, if available.

30. It would be the duty of the Investigating Officer to

inform the injured/victimfs)/legal representative(s) regarding

their rights by supplying Fouu-II attaching now chart within

10 days specifyingthe scheme to seek remedial measure. It

would be the dutY of the Investigating Officer to ask the

information in Form-III and FOrm-IV from the driver(s) and

32
 t e/
\

the owner(s) respectively within 30 days. As per the new

regnne' on receiving the information, Interim Accident Report

CIAR) shall be submitted by the InvestigatingOfficer to the

Claims Tribunal within 50 days in Form V along with

relevant documents. A copy of the said IAR shall be

furnished to the insurance company of the motor vehicle(s)

involved in the road accident, victim(s)/cldimant(6)1State

Legal Services Authority, insurer and General Insurance

Council. The InvestigatingOfficer or the insurance company

shall have right to verify the details of the driver and the

owner bY using the VAHAN App or shall take the help of

Registering Authority. Investigating Officer is dub bound to

take the relevant details from the victim(s) or the legal

representative(s), as the case may be and furnish the details

within 60 days in For'nr-w. Form_vI_Ais modulatedto he

minor children, who are in need. of care and protection in

terms of the Juvenile Justice CCare and Protection ' of
Children) Act, 2015.

31' On failure to submit the relevant information and

documents, as required in Forms III, IV and #1 by the

33
'acl

driver(s)' owner(s), claimant(s)or any info,-mation by the

lnsura11ce companY, the Investigating Officer may ask for

direction to the stakeholder(s) before the Claims Tribunal to

furnish such information within 15 days. The registeHng

authoritY is dutY bound to verifY the licence of driver, fitness

and permit of the vehicle(s) involved in the accident and shaH

suppIy such informationwithin 15 'days to the InvesUgaHn.g

Of$cer' Similarly, for the purpose of issuance of medico legal

repoTt or the post-mortemreport, the hospital is required to

furnish such infonnation to the Investigating Officer tWthin

15 days.

32' The Investigating Officer shall within 90 daYS

compile all relevant documentsand material in the form of

Detailed Accident Report CDAR) in Form-VII accompa„ying

site plan FoFm-VIII, mechanical inspection report Form-IX

' verification report Form_X and the report under Section

173 Code of Criminal Procedure CCr.P.C.) it would be the

dutY of the registeringauthority to verify the registration

cerUficate9 driving licence, fitness and permit in respect of

the vehicle(s) inVUlved in the accident and the same is

34
\

required to be submitted wIaHn 15 days to the Investigating

Officer to complete the IAR and DAR. The extension of time

limit to file IAR and DAR is only permissible where the

Investigating Officer approaches the Claims Tribunal in cases

where parties reside outside the jurisdiction of the Court or

where the driver’s licence is issued outside the jurisdiction of

the Court or where the victimCs) have suffered grievous

injuries and are undergoing continuous treatment. Thus1

the InvestigatingOfficer shall furnish FAR within 48 hours,

IAR within 50 days, complete the investigationwithin 60

days and file DAR within 90 days. copy of DAR shall be

furnished to the victim(s), owner(s)/driver(s) of the vehicle(s),

the insurance company involved and the State Legal Services

Authority including the Nodal Officer of the insurance

company and the General Insurance Council.

33. On perusal of the above, it is clear that to carry out the

purpose of the provisions of Sections 159 and 160 of the M.v.

AmendmentAct. the Officer In-charge of the police station

and the registering authority are required to act upon in a

manner as prescribed in the Ruled within tHe period as

35
 specifiedL’ thereby on receiving the information of accident

I Ie complete information regarding such accident is to be

made a\unable before the Claims Tribunal within the tan,e

limit without delay. As per Rules, the failure to peHbrm the

duties by the police officer may entail severe consequences

LS envISaged under the provisions of the State Police Act

Thus' legislative intent i' ,1,,, th,t ,n „p,rUng a road

1aL1C 1: i 1C 1e
H t
H][9pp][A +r Rt:]bILIe
n+: inves Uga bonO facer must complete all his

ac ion within Un-le frame and shall act as facilitator to the

vlctiln Cs)/claimant(s), insurance company by furnishing all

details in prescribed forms, thereby claimant(s) may get

damages/compepsation wIthout delay.

T :liU:I15111 1: () RT=RJfI;C:f =) M :::SJ\;}:I!}IMr B EF 1ORE

:34' Under the M. V. Amendment A,t a.d th, R„,1„ f;,m,d

lIEhereunder’by omitUng Chapter-X, the provisions for grant

o conWensation t=ndeF no-fault liabilitY have been delet,d

and the special procedure has been carved out introducing

Section 149' The aforesaid section is relevant to deal with

the issUe in context) therefore reproduced as thus.

36
 'S:+}
\

“ 149. SettZemen£ bg insurance company and

procedure therefor. –

(1) The insurance company shaLL, upon receiving

inJormation oJ the accident, either jrorrt ctairnartt or
through accident information report or otheru>ises
designate an oa(leT to settte the cLaims reLating to
such accident.

(2) An oWler ciesiqnated by the i71sura11cecompany jor

processing the settLement of cLaim Qf cornpenscthon
may make an oXer to the claimant yor settLement
be.fore the Claims Tribunal ga>ing such detaib,
tuithin thirty days and cg'ter /ouowirtg such
procedureas may be prescribed by the Central
GouernrnerLt.

f 33 IJ, the cLaimant to wttorrt the oa-er is ntcude urtczer

sub-section (2), –

(CV accepts such ojfer, –

(i) the CLaims Tribunal shaLLmake a record oy such
settlement, and such cLaim shaLL be deemed to
be settLed by consent; and
(iV the payment shall be made by the insurance
conlpctnY u)Man a nraximum pertoct of thirty
daYS torn the date oJ receipt Qf such record oy
settLement:

(b) rejects such ojfer, a date oy hectltng shctu,-,be.lhxed by

the CLaims Tribunal to adjudicate such cLaim on
merits .

35. As per Section 149, on receiving the information of the

accident from claimant or kam the Accident Information

Report WR), the insurance company shall appoint a

Designated Officer’ to settle the dlaitn. The said officer is

required to make an offer to the claimant(s), bFyeFi®Ing its

37
B' It

detail within. 30 daYS by following such procedure, as

presctibed bY the Central Government.Sub-section (3) of

Section 149 makes it clear that the offer made by the

Designated Officer may either be accepted or rejected by the

injured/victimor legal heirs of the deceased. In case, the

offer is accepted, the Claims Tribunal shall record the

settlement and treat such a claim as settled by consent. On

such sM:drhent, the payment has to be made by insurance

company within 30 -days. But, in the latter situation of

rejection of such offer, the Claims Tribunals shall fk a date

of hearing for adjudication of such claim on merits.

36. Section 164 of M. V. AmendmentAct is relevant to deal

With the claim cases in which negligence is not required to be

pleaded and proved and the same is reproduced thus:

Section 164 - Payment of compensationin case of

death or grievous hurt, etc

(1) NotuAthstanciing anything contained in this Act or

in any other tau) for the time being in .force or
instrument having the force of' tau), the owner of the
motorvehicle or the authorised insurer shan be liabLe
to pay in the case of death or grievous hurt due to any
CLCcictent arising out of the use of motor Det\teLe. a
compensctQon,of a sum of ju>e Lakh rupees in case of
cieat:h or of two and a hgV Lakh rupees in case oy
grievous hurt to the legal heirs or the uictirrl. as the
case may be.

38
q

(2J in any cLaim for compensation. under sub_section

(IJ, the cLaimant shaLL not be required to pLead or
estabLishthat the death or grievous hurt in respect oy
tvtach the claim has been made was due lo ana
unorIQ’ut act or neglect or deycLtat cg’ the owner ca the
uetUcte or of the vehkte concerned or oy any -other
person.

t33 WIlete, in respect Qf deathor gNeuoushurt due to

an accident aTtsing out oJ' the use of' motor uehtcte,
compenscabn has been paid under any other Law jc)r
the ame being in jk)rce. such amount of cornpensation
shaLL be reduced Iron the amount Qf coTT{pensatkjn
payabLe under this section.

37. The aforesaid provision has been brought where the

clairnantCs) is not required to plead or establish any wrongful

act or neglect or default of the owner(s) of the vehicle(s) or of

anY other person for paWrent of compensation. Therefore,

sub-section(1) has been given overriding effect limiting the

liability to pay compensationto the tune of Rs. 5 lak.hs in case

of death and Rs. 2.50 lakhs in case of grievous hurt to the legal

heirs or to the vicHmCs), as the case may be. , „.-h., is further

made clear the compensation, if payable in any other law, then

such amount is required to be reduced from the amount of

compensationpaYable under this Section, meaung thereby

the legislative intent is clear that a person9 who has suffered

with an accident must be compensated just and reasonably

and the victim(s)/famil#of the deceased must be paid fat (he

39
 I
@ /

bodily injury or Ioss of life caused by an accident by use of a

motor vehicle at a pubh(.' place.

38' in addition to the said process of adjudication, the

clai111antCs) have the ')pU011fQr taking recourse dire,dy by

approaching the Claims Tribu.nal . by filing an application

seeking conWensaUon' The said provision of Section 166 is

relevant and reproduced as thus.

“ 1 66. Application for cornperua.tion._

(1)
An appUcadon/or comperuaHon arising out of an
CKU'ient qJ the n“h"e specdiedin sub-,,,ti,n '(1) ,a
section 165 may benta.cie_ - ' “
(a)
bY the person who has sustcartedthe iryun.y ; or
(b)
bY the owner OJ-theproperty: or
(C)
utheR death has Tesutted tom the accictent. by an
or anY oJ- the legal represeracaiuesof the deceased.
or

Cdi bY anY agent duty authorized by the person iIUU.red

Of cat ot anY of the Legal representatiues oy the
deceased.hS the case may be:

Provided that u)here aU the Legal represeNcaives oJ the

deceased have not joined in any such appkcaHoT\ Jar

u;o::IT={ := ==1 :eaiT::I==:i : :L:= =t ::== n =Ft :: IT: e::I

anT the legal mpreserKaa',es who hauenot so joined, sh.an
be impteadgd as fespotIdents to the apphccaion.

Provided Jurater that where a person accepts comppnsaU_on

unqet section 1 64 in accofdancewah the procedure prouided

T==rIL= =::: 1 = = p I Its c I at 1rIr1usPe t a to n bq bre

i the CL dms

40
 t
X
LT)
\

i(2) EDery apphcaHon Ltrtcier sub-section (1) shall be made.

at the option of the cLairnantt eurwr to the Claims
Tribunal }lauing jw{sdictk>n ouer the area.in wha.h the
accident occurred or to the CkaiTU Tribunal within the
local Limits of whose jurbdiction the ckaTna'nt resides or
catTies on business or within the local Rnas of whose
iutis(Xctior\ the defendant resides, and sUIU be in such
.form and contain such paracutars CLS may be
prescribed:

J No application /or compel\saaon shaLI be entertained

iC3

unLess it is made within six months of the occurrence oy

the acciciertt.}

lt4J The Ctairns Tribunal shaLL treat any report of acckients

Jbru>cLrded to it Lt11ciersection 159 as an CLppU£a.tun y’or
coTnF'enscttk)n under this Act.}

1(5) Notu;tthstan(ling anything in this Act OF tIny other lau)

for the time being in force, the right ca a personto claim
con\pensatbnfor irgury {n an accidentshalt, uponth
death oJ the person irgured. survive to his Legal
representa&yes, irrespectiveof whether the cause oy
death is reLatable to or had any nexus with tb kyury or
not.]

39 .
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' in the case of death, all the representatives of the

deceased or any of them may ale an application. If all have

not joined as applidaht Cs), remaining may be j'aided ag

respondents.Under this Section, if the c1,arhant(g).apply for
41
e I

grant of compensation, they have option to choose the place

or the Claims Tribunal, which may have the jurisdiction
ei{her where, the accident occurred or the claimant(s) resides

or cmries business or in the local limits of whose jurisdiction

the defendant resides. For taking recourse under the

aforesaid Section, the application seeking compensation can

be entertained if it is filed within six months from the date

of the accident. As per second proviso of sub-section(1), it is

apparent that in case recourse under Section 164 or as per

the procedure specified in Section 149 has been taken and

the compensation is accepted by the claimant(63,then

recourse under Section 166 would not be available. 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.

40. On perusal of the scheme of the Act, it is clear that as

a first recoutse by not pleading or establishing proof of

\vrongful act, neglect or default of the owner or driver or of
42
\
t
q!)
the vehicle, the compensation can be claimed under Sec.Hon

164, but such compensation is of limited amount to the

tune, as specified in case of death or grievous injury. The

second recourse available to the claimant(s)is to apply by

prcYAng wrongful act and neglect of the owner(s) or the

driverts) before the Claims Tribunal by opting the

iuFisdiction at a place specified under sub-section(2-) but

such claim must be filed within six months from the date of

accident and be adjudicated by the Tribunal. The third

recourse has been prescdbedby introducing Section 149 of

M. V. AmendmentAct by which in case the claimant(s)ha+e

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 Tr,ibundlt

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 compensationif he/they

could not file the application under Section 166(1) of the Act.

41. As discussed above, Section 149 lays emphasis on the

settlement of the claim in case the liability of the insutanc6

company is not in dispute subject to COmplyingother

43
 +
et J

necessary formalities, as prescribed. The said provision also

emphasize the determination of compensation within time

fraine without delay, th8reby the victim may get

compensation for the damages at the earliest. On

harmonious reading and construing the said three Sections,

it is therefore clear that the M. V. 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 famiIY should not be left to suffer without payment of

damages. In cases of rash negligent driving where DAR

does not bring the charge of negligence or the claimant(s)

choose to claim compensationunder no-fault despite the

charge of negligence, the said claim shall be registeredunder

Section 164 and it be dealt with accordingly.

42. As per Rules, except in cases under Section 164, for

the claims either under Section 149 or 166. the procedure

pTescdbed in the M-V. AmendmentRules is required to be

followed bY the Claims Tribunal. As specified, on receiving

the FARt the Clahns Tribunal is required to register such

44
 I
W’:'
q

FAR as Miscellaneous Application. On filing the JAR and

DAR, it shall be attached mrd be made part of the

Miscellaneous Application. The Claims Tribunal is requirbd

to examine the FAR, :tAR or DAR, as the case may be and .in

the proceedings of the said Miscellaneous ApplicaUont

appropriate direction for production of requisite forms

prescribed in the Rules through claimant(s), driver(s),

ow11erCs)or extension of time, as specified, may be directed.

It should be kept in mind by the Claims Tribunal that the

said .:DAR may be treated as an application under Sectic}n

166 as per sub-section(4) thereof. In case the claimant(s)

have taken the recourse under Section 166(1) & (2) and filed

a separate claim petition, the said DAR may be tagged with

the said claim petition, otherwise the proceQd@gs under

Section 149 shall continue. The Claims Tribunal awaiting

the report under Section 173 Cr.P.(’-. may satis br itself with

respect to the negligence before passing an award.

43. On filing FAR, if IAR/DAR is not complete, the time

shall be fixed by the (-'laims Tribunal to complete the same

and OII corn})letion, the date for dppedtanbb j-jf thU davbr {bj;

45
O P

ownerCs) , claimant(s)and eye witness(s) shall be fixed and

theY shall be produced by the Investigating Officer on the

date so fixed. It shall also be the duty of the Invesugaung

Officer to intimate the Nodal Officer of the insurance

company and also the insurance company to secure their

presence on such date.

44. After lodging the FIR and on receipt of information by

the insurance company, it would be the duty of the company

to appoint a Nodal Officer and furnish the intimation to the

state police, who shall co-ordinate with all stakeholders. On

receiving the information through Nodal Officer, the

insurance company shall verify the claim up to the stage of

filing the DAR. In case it is found that DAR is not correct,

the Designated Officer of the insurance company shall send a

copy of the report of the surveyor/investigatorto the Deputy

CorTlmissioner or equivalent officer of the Police Department

or otherwise to carly out the purpose of Section 159. The

said officer shall make an offer to the claimant(s)for

settlement before the Claims Tribunal, specifring the details

of offer and subrtat the said proposal. within 30 days of

46
 'I '(f )
\,

DAR in Form-XI along with the report of the

suIveyor/investigator.On 3ubmitting such form, the

claimantCs)may accept the offer of the insurance company or

maY Teject the same. In case the offer is accepted, the

Claims Tribunal shall take such offer on record and by the

consent the claim be settled recording satisfaction that the

compensation, as settled, is just and reasonable and pass an

award in terms of such settlement. Prior to passing an

award, it is open to the Tribunal to examine the claimant(is)

for ascertainingtheir financial condition, owner(s), driver(s)

and the insurer to submit their defence, if any to satisfy

itself. 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 compensationfor which the date of hearing shall

be fixed bY the Tribunal to adjudicate the claim on merit.

After fixing the date and recording the evidence, if required,

written submissions may be taken a'nd thereafter Tribunal

shall finally adjudicate and decide the claim. After passing

the award, cOpy of the bAI and the a bard so pasged be sent

to the criminal court and accordingly, the Miscellaneous

47
 Application registeredby the Tribunal shall be treated as
disposed of.

45' As per the discussionmade hereindbove,it is made

dear that the M'V' Amendment Act and the Rules have been

lntroduced with an advent to implement the steps taken by

the Court issuing dkecUonsto carry out the purpose of the

benevolentlegislation. As per the M. V. adnendment Act

lnsurance of the vehicle’ until exempted,is made necessary

to carry out the purpose of the Act and the Rules subJect to
the conditions, as specified under Section 147

46' The claimant(s) have been given three options- to claim

compensation before the Claims Tribunal. As discussed

hereinabove, the option under Section 164 is without

pleading the proof of negligence wIIIe option under Section

166(1) & (2) by the claimant(s)is by proving the negligence

of the oaending Vehicle. In addition, Section 149 is

added bY which the de novo procedure has been prescribed

48
 UJ,
\

immediate on registration of FIR by taking action through

the police officer before the Claims Tribunal. It is urged by

leaTned Amicus Cudae that the said procedure is not being

followed in most part of the coun w 'by the Claim T1.jbunais

though the said Section is a complete code in itself in the

matter of distribution of the compensation. Therefore
appropFiate directions are required.

47' As pTescribedunder M. V. Amendment Act and

Rules, the police officials grId the registeringauthority We

bound to take action in the event when an accident takes

place and the information is received by them. Further, it is

seen that as per Rule 3 of the M.v. Attend.mentRules the

police officer is required to furnish the details to the

victimCs) regarding his/their rights in a road accident and the

flow chart of the scheme along with Forrn-II is required, .to b;e
furnished to them. The said How chart and all othdr
documents, as specified in the Rules, must be either in

vernacularlanguage or in English and shall be furnished to

the claimant(s) or other affected persons, as per their

convenlence' TheY are required to take immediate action and

submit the report to the Claims Tribunal ihfotming the

49
victim(s) 9 driver(S)9 owner(s) , insurance company mld other

stakeholderswith an intent to facilitate them. subject to the

directions of the Claims Tribunal. 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.

48 in our viewt the contentionsadvanced by the learned

counsels deserve to be allowed. The police officers and

registerihgauthority are duty bound to act as per the M.v.
/

AmendmentAct and the Rules and are required to submit

the FAR, IAR and DAR within the prescribedperiod under

the Rules. The registering authority is also bound to take

action in the matter of verification of the permit, fitness of

vehicle, driver licence and on other ancillary issues. The

insurance company is bound to appoint the Nodal Officer as

per Rule 24 to facilitate the InvestigatingOfficer in the matter

of enquiry and investigation, submitting details regarding

insurance and co-ordinate with the stakeholders.

49. In our view, the procedure carved out under Section

149 of the AmendmentAct is de novo on Bling the FAR

before the Claims Tribunal and Tribunal is required to

50
 L= ’J'

register such proceedingsas Miscellaneous Application. On

filing IAR and DAR by the police officer within the time as
specified, it shall be made part thereof. If the claimant(s) has

not opted for taking recourse under Section 166(1) within the

time Ihnit of six months, such MiscellaneousApplicationmay

be treated as an application under Section 166(4) of M.v.

AmendmentAct and be adjudicatedin accordance with law.

TheFefore, the procedure as prescribedunder Section 149 is

in addition to the proceedings of Sections 164, 166 of M.v.

AmendmentAct and such mandate of law is required to be

followed in true sense and spirit.

50. Learned Amicus Curiae contends that in a situati'611

where the clailnantCs) OPts to file a claim petition under

Section 166 other than a place where the accident has take}1

place taking recourse of Section 166(2) of the M.v.

AmendmentAct, the proceedings initiated under Section 149

is required to be closed and tagged with those proceedingg.

It is also urged that possibility of filing application by optIng

Che Claims Tdbunals at different places within territorial

jurisdiction of different High Court by othet ul'aidlant(B)

51
a a

cannot be IUled out. It is further contended that in case the

claim petitions have been filed at different places by different

clahnantCs) within the territorial jurisdiction of different High

Courts! appropriate directions to transfer those cases at one

place in exercise of the power under Section 142 of the

Constitution of India needs to be issued, thereby the delay

rnay be curbed in proceedingthe cI,am case.

51 . In our view, the arguMent as advanced is having force,

therefore9 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

the event of filing a separate application and on receiving the

information in this regard either from the claimant(s), or

investigating officer or insurance company, the proceedings

under Section 149 shall be deemed as closed and be tagged

with the proceedings of Sections 164/ 166 filed by the

claimant(s). In case the claimant(s)/legal representative(s)

have filed different applications under . Secti,’)n 166 before

different Claan Tribunals at different places outside . the

52
 \

\+

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

claimantCs)/legal representative(s) in the territorial limits of

otheF High Courts shall stand transferred to the ClaMs

Tribunal where the first claim petition was filed and the '

proceedings under Section 149 shall be tagged with the said

file. In order to curb the delay on account of pendency of

claim petition(s) before different Claim Tribunals within the

territorial jurisdiction of different High Courts, such direction

is necessaCY. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to exerciqe

our power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. It is

directed that Registrar General of the High Courts shall

lssue appropriate orders for transferring the subsequent

proceedingsand records to the Claims Tribunal where th'e

first claim petition filed by the claimant(s)is pending. It is

made clear here that the parties are not required to file any

tPansfer petition before this Court seeking order of transfer in

such individual cases pending in the jurisdiction of differeht

High Courts
53
O d

52. Learned Amicus Curiae has further pointed out that in

some High Courts, distribution memos attaching the Claims

Tribunal to the police stations have not been issued,

however taking recourse under Section 149 of the M.V.

AmendmentAct is not possible within the prescribedperiod

of time', therefore directions may be issued to prepme the

distribution memos by the High Courts with respect to

1

police stations and Claim£ Tribunals in order to implement

the recourse of Section 149 of the M. V. AmendmentAct

and the Rules may be issued and the same be notified in

public domain for the convenience of public.

53. In this regard, it would suffice to observe that in the

High Courts, where the distribution of police stations and

specified Claims Tribunals is not already in force, steps shall

be' taken by the Registrar Generals to prepare distribution

memos and notify the same time to time. thereby .the

proceedingsunder Section 149 may continue effectivelyin

such Claim Tribunals without any delay. The Tribunals, as

notified, shall take recourse as discussed and on

appointment of the Designated Officer as per Rule 23 of the

Rules, the settlement of claim may be processed by the

54
\
t

Lgb:2

Insurance company. The said proceedingswould continue

until it is tagged with the claim petitions if any, filed under

Section 166 of the M. V. AmendmentAct. It is also made

clear that if the claimant(s)have not taken any recourse

undeF Section 166, then the miscellaneousapplication be

treated as claim petition under Section 166(4) of the M. V.

AmendmentAct and the Claims Tribunal is duty bound td

decide such claim by following the procedure in accordance

with law.

M. It is contendedby learned Amicus Curiae that in case

the liability of the insurance company is not disputed jn

terms of the policy conditions commensurate to Section 147

of the Act, the offer so made by the Designated Officer ought

to be reasonablespecifying the detailed reasons to .make

such offer within the time as prescribed. On the said oKet,

the Claims Tribunal shall seek consent of the claimant(sD,

whether they agree for the same. In case, the claimant(s)

does not agree with the said offer, the enquiry under Section

149C'3) should be limited to the extent of enhancementof

compensationghiftirig britis to clailh such elihahbefhdl'.'lt dh

55
 +

claimantCs) which is required to be discharged by the

claimant(s) .

55' We find force in the said contention. Therefore, we

direct that the Designateq Officer, while making offer, shall

assign detailed reasons to show that the amount which is

offered is just and reasonable. In case, the said offer is not

accepted bY the claimant(s), the onus would shift on the

cIa#nafi;ttg)’' - to seek for enhancement of the amount of

compensationand the said enquirY under Section 149(3)

would be limited for enhancement only.

56' Learned Amicus Curiae further submits that in case

the claimantCs)wishes to OPt to take recourse under Section

166 of the M'V' Amendment Act opting jurisdiction of Claims

Tdbuna1 as specified under Section 166(2), in such cases

directions may be issued to join the Nodal Officer/Designated

Ofacer' of the insurance companies of a place where the

accident took place. The said recourse is necessary to

further curb the delaY in tagging the proceedingg of Section

149' Those Designated Officer/Nodal Officer may be in a

position to clafifY regarding the details of the proceedings

56
 S (i,_TO
LI

already taken under Section 149 of the M. V. amendment Act

before the Claims Tribunal concerned.

57' We find force in the said contention. Therefore, we

direct that if the claimant(s)wants to exercise the option

under Section 166(2) of the M. V. AmendmentAct, he/they

are free to take such recourse by joining the Designatdd

Officer/Nodal Officer of the insuran g.le company of the place

where the accident occurred as respondent in the clam1

petition.

58' 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

Academiesworldng under the control of the , High Courts

with respect to the provisions of the M. V. Alnend.mentAct

and the Rules, thereby the said procedure must be adopted

in-coordination with the police officials, insurance companies

and other stakeholders. We are in agreement to the said

submission and direct the State Judicial Acdde1,mesto take

recourse to sensitize the stakeholdersincludihg the said

57
 r
as al

subject in their annual training calendar as earlV as

possible.

59' Learned Amicus CuTiae has shown the apprehension

that the procedure, as specified under SecTIons 149, 159 and

160 of the M. V. AmendmentAct and Rules, is for see lang

compensationde no\Ky As per the said procedure, the

greater liabilitY has been fastened on the police officers,

Fegiste+filg authority, Nodal Officer and Designated ORI(.ner of

the insurance companies. In such a situation, at least

officers of the police department must be ,,,,,eII equipped and

conversantwith the provisions and rules and efficient to

discharge the function as specified in the Act and the Rules

OrdinariIY the police officers may be efficient in investigation

of the complicated criminal cases but the procedure as

prescribed in the M'V' AmendmentAct and Rules is different
than the pTocedure of investigation in crirn{naI cases. In fact

it fasten dutY on the police officer as a facibtator, in addition

to the investigatorand submit the report in prescribedforms.

Therefore, the trained and equipped police officers may be

posted in the poliee stations constituting a special unit to

make investigation for motor accideht claim cases. After
58
\

going through the procedure, as discussed in detail above, we

find some substance in the argument. In our view, the head

of the Home Department of the State and .the Director

General of Police in all States/Union Territories shall ensure

the compliance of the Rules by constituting a special unit in

the police stations or at least at town level to investigate and

facilitate the motor accident claim cases. The said action

must be ensured within a period of three months from

today.

60. The learned amicus curiae further submitted that in

recording the evidence by Claims Tribunal, dppointrnent of

lacal commissioner as per Rule 30 of the MV Amendheht

Rules 2022 may also be directed, otherwise looking at the

pendency of claim cases before the Tribunals, it will (.laude

delay in disposal.

61. In our view the said contention is as per Rule 30.

Wllere the insurance company disputes the liability, the

Claims Tribunal is duby bound to record the evidence

through the local commissioner and the fee/expenses of such

local commissioner shdl be 'borhe by the insuratBb

company.

59
62' Ac:cOrdirlgly, this appeal is d,,id,d with th, f,..,U„,ang
directions:

D The appeal ale.d by the owner challenging the

lssue of habilitY is hereby dismissed confirming the
OTder passed bY the High cc)art and MA(_’T.

U On receiving the intimation regarding road

accidgnt bY use of a motor vehicle at public place, the

SHO concerned shall take steps as per Section 159 of

the M.V. AmendmentAct.

iii) After registeringthe FIR, InvestigatingOfficer

shall take recourse as specified in the M. V. Amendment

Rules’ 2022 and submit the FAR within 48 hours to

the Claims Tribunal' The IAR and DAR shall be filed

before the Claims Tribunal within the time limit subject

to compliance of the provisions of the Rules

M The registering officer is duty bound to verIfy

the registrationof the vehicle9 driving licence, fitness of

vehicle, permit and other ancillary issues and submit

the report in coordination to the police officer before

the Claims TIlbullal

60
 I C=' J
++

vi ’l'lle flow chart and all other documents, as

specified in the Rules, shall either be in vernacular

language or in English language, as the case may be

and shall be supplied as per Rules. The Investigating

Officer shall inform the victim(s) /legal

representativeCs), driverCs), owner(s) , insurance

companies and other stakeholders with respect to the

action taken following the M.v. AmendmentRu,les and

shall take steps to produce the witnesses on the .date,

so fixed by the Tribunal

vi) For the purpose to carry out the direction

No. Mi), distribution of police stations attaching them

with the Claim Tribunals is required. - Therefore,

distribution memo attaching the police stations to the

Claim Tribunals shall be issued by the RegisU'ar

General of the High Courts from time to time, if not

alreadY issued to ensure the compliance of the Rules.

vii) in view of the M.V. Anendment Act and RuGs,

as discussedhereinabovel the role of the Investigating;

Officer is very important. He is required to COIb})'ly Math

61
the -provisions of the Rules within the time limit, as

prescribed therein. Therefore , for effective

implementation of the M.V. Amendment Act and the

Rules framed thereunder, the specified trained police

personnel are required to be deputed to deal with the

motor accident claim cases. Therefore, we direct that

the Chief Secretary/Director General of Police in each

and ”every State/Union Territory shall develop a

specialized unit in every police station or at town level

and post the trained police personnel to ensure the

compliance of the provisions of the M. V. Amendment

Act and the Rules, within a period of three months

from the date of this order.

viii) On receiving FAR from the police station, the

Claims Tribunal shall register such FAR as

Miscellaneous Application. On filing the IAR and DAR

by the InvestigatingOfficer in connection udth the said

FAR; it shall be attached with the same Miscellaneous

Application.The Claims Tribunal shall pass

appropriate orders in the said application to carry out

62
 e’s,g
le

the purpose of Section 149 of the M. V. Amend.mentAct

and the Rules, as discussed above.

N The Claim Tribunals are directed to sati.sb

themsel','es with the offer of the Designated Officer of

the insurance company with an intent to award_ just

and reasonable compensation.After recording such

satisfaction, the settlement be recorded under Section

149(2) of the M. V. AmendmentAct, subject to consent

bY the claimantCs). If the claimant(s) is not ready to

accept the same, the date be fixed for hearing and

affording an opportunity to produce the documentsand,

other evIdence seeking enhancement9 the petition be

decided. In the said event, the said enquiry shall be

limited only to the extent of the enhancement of

compensation, shifting onus on the claimant(s).

g The General Insurance Council and all

lnsurance companies are directed to issue appropriate

directions to follow the mandate of Section 149 of the

M. V. AmendmentAct and the amended Rules. The

appointment of the Nodal Officer Prescribed in Rule 24

63
and the Designated Officer prescribedin Rule 23 shall

be immediately notified and modified orders be also

notified . time to time to all the police

stations/stakeholders.

xi) if the claImant(s) files an application under

Section 164 or 166 of the M.V. 7bnendmentAct, on

receivIng the information, the Miscellaneous

Application registeredunder Section 149 shall be sent

to the Claims Tribunal where the application under

Section 164 or 166 is pending immediateIY bY the

(qlaims Tribunal.

xii) in case the claimantCs) or legal representative(s)

of the deceased have filed separate claim petitionts) 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 subsequentclaim

petition(s) shall stand transferred :o the Claims

Tribunal where the first claim petition was filed and

pending. It is made clear here that the claimant(g are

64
 \&? P
t

not required to apply before this Court see lang transfer

of other claim petition(s) though filed in the territorial

jurisdiction of different High Courts. The Registrar

Generals of the High Courts shall take appropriate
steps and pass appropriate order in this regard in
furtherance to the directions of this Col-lrt

xiii) if the claimant(s)takes recourse under Section

164 or 166 of the M.V. ;knendment Act, as the case

maY be, he/they are directed to join Nodal

Officer/Designated Officer of the insurance company as

respondents in the claim petition as proper party of the

place of accident where the FIR has been registered by

the police station. Those officers may facilitate the

Claims Tribunal specifying the recourse as taken

under Section 149 of the M. V. Amendment Act.

xiv) Registrar General of the High Courts, Stat6s

Legal Services Authority and State Judicial Academies

are requestedto sensitize all stakeholders as early as

possible with respect to the provisions of Chapters Xl

and XII of the M. t. Afnendiheht Act and the M. V

6b
@) F

JIIII
!I[I•ppI•#B1e 1B+H1Lb
d 1][••H][•e nt RUles ) 2022 and tO ensure the mandate of

law.

••11s!IpIipr H]F0 r C 0 H1]][=PI i 1aUnIn C e of nl and ate of RUle 30 of the

I VIf][ • IIVpr• JIII!Ir!I[[IAF•I e Hr1d grn ent Rules ) 2022 ) it iS directed that on

disPuting the nabjhb by the insurance company, the

1 1a11HdFH][g#FH]L s rFri b u gH][]L IaL][ s h all record the evidence through

gF1Jo c IaL1 1C o m issio er a

H][Bp••][ B][H+1d the fee and expenses of such

Local---Commissioner shall be borne by the insurance

company.

wi) The State Authorities shall take appropriate

steps to dunlop a joint web portal/platform to

coordinate and facilitate the stakeholders for the

purpose to carR out the provisions of M. V. Amendment

Act and the Rules in coordinaUonMtb any technical

agency and be notified to public at large

H2 • HFtegi s tH•rr o f t HLILi s our

1(1p1HFHHHHp11 tis dh ected to circulate the copy of

tI i s j L1
IL e
dgH][1[H••][p p][][n t t o t H][ie Regis bar General of all High Courts and

t Ie
H H][]Li
1Chp1HHHHgh11 e f 11S e Cr e ta ry / /A his tr at or of all the States / Union

66
q\

Territories for implementation and to carry out the purpose of

Motor Vehicle Amendment Act and the Rules made' thereunder.

(S. ABDUL NAZEER)

(J.K. MAHESHWARI)
New Delhi;
December 15, 2022.

67