If they are read so, then it is no more the right of an accident victim to file a claim petition under Section 166 but it has bloomed into a full fledged duty on the part of the police. The police on investigation have to file an FAR (First Accident Report), IAR (Interim Accident Report) and DAR (Detailed Accident Report). As per Rule 18 of Annexure XIII, it has been mandatory on the Claims Tribunal to kick start the compensatory mechanism. Rule 21 of the Central rules ensures that the DAR filed by the police shall be treated as a Claim Petition.
20.Taking note of all these developments, the Supreme
Court of India rendered a Judgment in Gohar Mohammed v.
Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation and others in
S.L.P.(C).No.32448 of 2018. A reading of this Judgment goes to
show that the Police are no more playing a mere role of an
Investigating Authority and stopping with mere parting of
information. They are mandated by the Parliament to file reports with the Claims Tribunal, which should treat the same as a claim petition. The claimants have been freed from the shackles and are no more burdened to search for the documents necessary for filing a claim. The duty to report is now the police and the duty to process the said information given by the police and uploaded on to the website lies on the Tribunal. When access is given to the Tribunal to an FIR and the other details which have been uploaded by the police the claimant need not be made to run around or suffer from a fear that his petition is barred by time. It is the duty of the Claims Tribunal to access the information available to it and process the claim and give succour to the victims. It is not an adversarial system as was practiced before 01.04.2022 other parts of India (before 12.09.1979 in Tamil Nadu) but today it is a people oriented justice delivery Tribunal.
30.A reading of Section 166(4) shows that if any report of the
accident is forwarded to it under Section 159, the same shall be treated as an application for compensation. It is no more the discretion of the police. Rule 4(A)(5)(1) of the Tamil Nadu Rules read with the Central rules make it mandatory. It has now become a statutory duty of the Police to sent a report. It is pertinent to point out that the amendment under Section 166(4) does not speak about the
Interim Accident Report (IAR), First Accident Report (FAR) and
Detailed Accident Report (DAR) but speaks about “any report that has been sent by the police”. Therefore, even if an FIR sent by the police to the Tribunal, the same should be treated a Claim
Petition.
31.The upshot of the discussion is that on registration of an
FIR, a claimant is entitled to present the petition without the fear
of it being thrown out, on the ground of limitation. This would
be the correct reading of the present legal dispensation in all cases where FIR is registered within six months, of the date of any motor accident which takes place after 01.04.2022.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
CORAM
MR. JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN
C.R.P.No.2558 of 2023
Malaravan Vs Praveen Travels Private Limited,
The present revision petition raises a very interesting
question of law. The question of law is being interpretation of
Section 166 (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Facts of the case:
2.The case of the petitioner is that he was driving towards
Oragadam Village on his way back home. The 1st respondent's
vehicle was driven by the 2nd respondent in a negligent manner
which resulted in injury. The date of the accident is on
11.10.2022. He filed his Claim Petition claiming that,
compensation under Section 140 read with Section 166 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, in M.A.C.T.O.P.(SR).No.3280 of 2023
on 19.04.2023. The said petition was returned on 25.04.2023. The
return reads as follows:
“Petition is returned as per limitation barred.”
Challenging the said return, the present revision has been filed.
3.Mr.Jaisingh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
would submit that the Claim Petition was filed with a delay of 8
days due to his treatment. On account of the accident, the
petitioner suffered fracture in his left leg and so, he had to rely
upon his family members for his day to day life. Hence, he could
not file the claim petition within six months. He would state that
he was suffering from disability as the Doctors have advised him,
being a compound wound he would have to take bed rest and
consequently, there is a delay. He would request a direction to be
given in the Revision to number the MACTOP.
4.Considering the importance of the issue, I appointed
Mr.N.Vijayaraghavan, Advocate, Madras High Court, as an
Amicus Curiae. This Court places on record its gratitude for the
ready acceptance of this assignment by Mr.N.Vijayaraghavan.
The learned counsel has been appointed as Amicus Curiae in
several matters by this Court and by the Supreme Court in
matters relating to insurance and the interpretation of Motor
Vehicles Act.
History of limitations to petitions for compensation:
5.Before dealing with the merits of the case, it is necessary to
deal with how the Law relating to Limitation arose in the Motor
Vehicles Act.
6.The first statutory intervention with respect to Motor
Vehicles came under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. This
legislation was in force for nearly fifty years. Under Section 110A
of the Motor Vehicles Act, the period of limitation for the purpose
of making a claim was “six months” from the date of the accident.
The rigour of the Section was softened by a proviso being added
to the said Section. Under that proviso, it was left to the
discretion of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal to condone the
delay in filing the petition claiming compensation if “sufficient
cause” had been shown. This applied for any length of delay and
it was not confined to any particular period.
7.The Motor Vehicles Act of 1939, was repealed by the
consolidated legislation in 1988. The said Motor Vehicles Act of
1988 came into force on 01.07.1989. Under the new Act, Section
166 was introduced. The period of limitation for filing a claim
was six months. The unbridled discretionary power granted to
the Court under the proviso to Section 110A was taken away,
though not in its entirety, but was confined only to a further six
months period. This led to a lot of litigations as the claims were
filed after the condonable period.
8.Taking into consideration the difficulties that have been
caused to the claimants, the Parliament amended Section 166 of
the Motor Vehicles Act of 1988. The proviso which restricted the
power of the Tribunal to condone the delay only upto six months
(beyond the original period of six months) was deleted. This was
as per Act 56 of 1994. The said amendment came into force on
14.11.1994.
9.Interpreting the amended Section 166 of the Act,
the Supreme Court was pleased to hold in Dhannlal v. D.P.
Vijayvargiya and others [1996 (4) SCC 652 as follows:
“It can be said that Parliament realised the grave
injustice and injury which was being caused to the heirs
and legal representatives of the victims who died in
accidents by rejecting their claim petitions only on
ground of limitation. It is a matter of common knowledge
that majority of the claimants for such compensation are
ignorant about the period during which such claims
should be preferred. After the death due to the accident, of
the bread earner of the family, in many cases such
claimants are virtually on the streets. Even in cases
where the victims escapes death some of such victims are
hospitalized for months if not for years...”
10.By virtue of this Judgment, persons approached the
Court after any length of time. The provisions stood still, till the
new amendment to Section 166 of the Act. Under the new Section
166 which came with effect from 01.04.2022, the period of
limitation has been re-introduced. Section 166 reads as follows:
“166.Application for compensation.- (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. ”
11.Under this provision no claim can be entertained beyond
the period of six months from the date of the accident. Perhaps
this has worked on the mind of the learned Judge to come to the
conclusion that the MACTOP filed by the Civil Revision
Petitioner is barred.
12.Mr.N.Vijayaraghavan, the learned Amicus Curiae would
take me to the history behind Section 158(6) of the Motor Vehicles
Act (prior to Section 159). According to him, the said Section was
introduced by the Parliament under Act 56 of 1994 with effect
from 14.11.1994. He would state that this was in recognition of
“Epistolary Jurisdiction” developed by the Supreme Court in
public interest litigations. He would state that by virtue of
Section 158(6), an FIR registered by the Police was mandated to be
filed before the jurisdictional Claims Tribunal as well as before
the State Legal Services Authority. He would bring to my notice
that Section 158(6) (now Section 159) was never given life till the
substantial amendments were made on 01.04.2002.
13.On 01.04.2022, Chapter XI to the Motor Vehicles Act was
introduced. It is the submission of the learned Amicus that
Section 159 (Pari materia to 158(6)) has to be read along with the
newly introduced Sections. He adds Section 159 will have to be
read along with the Rules which have been notified by the
Government of India titled to the “Central Motor Vehicle Rules”.
Section 159 reads as follows:
“159.Information to be given regarding
accident.- The police officer shall, during the
investigation, prepare an accident information report to
facilitate the settlement of claim in such form and manner,
within three months and containing such particulars and
submit the same to the Claims Tribunal and such other
agency as may be prescribed.”
14.Section 159 mandates that on the occurrence of the
accident the police should file FIR and when read with the rule
send a copy of the same within 48 hours within the jurisdictional
MACT. This in line with 150A of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules
(CMV). He would state that the procedure that has been found
gets inspiration from the Judgment of the Hon'ble Mr. Justice
J.R.Midha (As His Lordship then was) of the Delhi High Court in
R.Rajesh Tyagi I to Rajesh Tyagi IV.
Regime between 2017 and 2022 in Tamil Nadu:
15.The learned Amicus Curiae would bring to my notice to
the Judgment of the Supreme Court in Jayapraksh v. National
Insurance Company Limited by a judgment dated 13.05.2016. It
extended the principle that had been laid down by the Delhi High
Court in the aforesaid judgment PAN India. He would also bring
to my notice to the Judgment of this Court in the case of
Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited, II
Floor, Date House, 2, NSC Bose Road, Chennai – 600 001 v. The
Inspector of Police, Cuddalore OT Police Station, Cuddalore, in
Crl.O.P.No.18110 of 2016 dated 12.09.2017 Paras 21 and 22 read
as follows:
“21 While the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals
were afforded access first, and then Legal Services
Authorities, and then insurance companies and transport
corporations, SCRB took time to provide access to the
victims/claimants and owners/drivers (who could be
christened as accused at one level). SCRB has now
completed the circle by providing access to the last
segment also at a low price on and from 31/8/2017,
within the promised dateline or mandated timeline of this
Court. It adds a feather to the cap of SCRB for not only
conceiving this facility but ensuring its implementation
without any time overruns as well. Tamil Nadu Police
can take pride that they have met the mandate of law and
leading the way as the first and only State as on date in
implementation of DAR regime.
22.The claimants/victims and owners/drivers, when
they are registered and their details captured with mobile
numbers, are given an One Time Password (OTP) with
which they can have access to the uploaded DAR
compilation for a small fee of Rs.10/- per document. In
fact, if there is proper marketing of this dispensation and
the ordinary citizen becomes aware, possibly, just
possibly, the sale and purchase of victims as commodities
may cease and the claimants/victims may get full control
over their lives and claims to seek their own counsel and
file claims of their choice, rather than being peddled as
commodities for a price, immediately upon an accident,
and being more often than not compelled, to file claims
through a select community of practitioners who
dominate the jurisdiction. So, the benefits flowing from
this DAR regime are limitless except that it is for the
stakeholders to appreciate, assimilate, understand and
utilize it to their benefit. SCRB may be doing their job by
uploading the data and offering it on a platter to the
stakeholders, all of them, in particular, the
claimants/victims, at their door step. If the
claimants/victims become aware of this facility and wait a
wee bit, they can avoid themselves being sold as
commodities, since access to documentation under the
DAR regime is within their grasp to take full control of
their claims. But, if the claimants/victims fail or refuse to
take advantage of this wonderful dispensation, we would
still not be failing in our duty, for claimants/victims may
be failing themselves. We can take the horse to the water
but it is for the horse to drink for we cannot coerce it into
doing so.”
16.By virtue of these Judgments, the development in
Information Technology which was rapid in other fields was
embraced under the Motor Vehicles Act. Insofar as the State of
Tamil Nadu is concerned, Rule 4A(5) was introduced by the
Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal Rules,
1989. This was pursuant to the “nudge” given by the Court in the
aforesaid Judgement. The said Rule reads as follows:
4-A. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in
rule 3 and 24, any Police Officer not below the rank of a
Sub-Inspector of Police, who is entrusted with the
investigation of the motor vehicles accident, shall,
without waiting for the result of the investigation
or prosecution and as expeditiously as possible get
an application in Forms I and II appended to these
rules from the party injured in the accident or all or
any of the legal representatives of the deceased, as
the case may be, and forward the same to the
Claims Tribunal, who shall treat it an application
for the purpose of section 140 and 166 of the Act. The
said Police Officer shall also gather full particulars of the
Insurance Certificate in respect of the motor vehicle
involved in the accident and furnish them to the injured
party or to the legal representatives of the deceased. The
party concerned shall, before the Tribunal passes the
award, pay the fee prescribed in rule 24. An officer
investigating into an accident shall, after a case is
registered forward copies of the First Information Report
relating to the accident to (i) the Claims Tribunal having
jurisdiction; and (ii) the President of the District
Committee for Legal Aid and Advice concerned
constituted by the Tamil Nadu State Legal Aid and
Advice Board; An officer investigating into an accident
shall, immediately after an accident is registered, also
furnish the particulars to the nearest Legal-Aid
Committee or centre constituted by the Tamil Nadu State
Legal Aid and Advice Board in Form III Appendix III
to/these rules. Notwithstanding anything contained in
sub-rule (3), the officer of the Transport Department
inspecting the vehicle involved in an accident shall
furnish immediately the following information to the
Insurance Company with which the vehicle is insured;—
(i)Name and address of the owner of the vehicle;
(ii)Name of the driver and/or conductor;
(iii)Registration number of the vehicle;
(iv)Particulars of permits if any, in respect of the
vehicle, with validity;
(v)Date of expiry of fitness certificate; and
(vi)Date of expiry of the insurance.
(5) (i) All the documents related to motor vehicles
accidents including the report in Form IV shall be
uploaded digitally or scanned or by any other means by
the Investigating Officer on Crime and Criminal
Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS) platform and
the same may be forwarded to the Claims Tribunal and
Legal Service Authority digitally. Upon such uploading
of documents, the State Crime Records Bureau (SCRB)
shall duly intimate the report in Form IV digitally to the
Claims Tribunal and Legal Service Authority concerned
in the State. (ii) All the Stake holders such as Insurance
Companies, Transport Corporation, owners of Motor
Vehicles, drivers of Motor Vehicles, Claims Tribunals,
Legal Service Authorities etc., can have access to the
Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems
(CCTNS) platform and download the relevant documents
related to Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims on payment
basis or free of cost as per prevailing practice. (iii) In view
of the online Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and
Systems (CCTNS) platform developed by the State Crime
Records Bureau (SCRB) and availability of necessary
documents relating to Motor Accidents online for
download by all stake holders, the need for physical
preparation and submission of Detailed Accident Report
(DAR) documents to all stake holders is hereby dispensed
with"
17.A conjoint reading of these rules shows that in the State
of Tamil Nadu, all the documents relating to the motor vehicles
accidents including the report under Form - IV are digitally
uploaded on to the CCTNS platform. A direction was given
under Rule 4(A)(5) (I) to forward the same to the Claims Tribunal
or Legal Services Authority digitally. It empowered all
stakeholders such as, Insurance Companies, Transport
Corporation, owners of the motor vehicles, drivers, Claims
Tribunal, Legal Services Authority to have the access to CCTNS
platform. It enables them to download the relevant documents of
the motor vehicles claim on payment of charges or free of costs.
18.The learned Amicus Curiae would submit that the
nominal charges have been levied by the State Crime Record
Bureau which has been issued in order to develop the platform
further. This amendment insofar as the Tamil Nadu came into
force pursuant to the Judgment of this Court. The statistics of the
crime record bureau shows from 2017 onwards as many as
10,55,158 documents relating to motor accidents are available for
download/access by all stakeholders. All that the stakeholders
have to do is download the documents and register it as a claim.
The learned Amicus represents that though the feast is ready, the
invitees to the party, namely, the MACT, victims, etc., are yet to
partake in the same.
Shift from right to duty:
19.The Parliament taking note of such a rapid development
in Information Technology introduced Section 166(3) and 166(4)
of the Motor Vehicles Act. These Sections have to be read along
with Rule 150A read with Annexure XIII of Central Motor
Vehicles Rules with Forms I to IX. If they are read so, then it is
no more the right of an accident victim to file a claim petition
under Section 166 but it has bloomed into a full fledged duty on
the part of the police. The police on investigation have to file an
FAR (First Accident Report), IAR (Interim Accident Report) and
DAR (Detailed Accident Report). As per Rule 18 of Annexure
XIII, it has been mandatory on the Claims Tribunal to kick start
the compensatory mechanism. Rule 21 of the Central rules
ensures that the DAR filed by the police shall be treated as a
Claim Petition.
20.Taking note of all these developments, the Supreme
Court of India rendered a Judgment in Gohar Mohammed v.
Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation and others in
S.L.P.(C).No.32448 of 2018. A reading of this Judgment goes to
show that the Police are no more playing a mere role of an
Investigating Authority and stopping with mere parting of
information. They are mandated by the Parliament to file reports
with the Claims Tribunal, which should treat the same as a claim
petition. The claimants have been freed from the shackles and are
no more burdened to search for the documents necessary for
filing a claim. The duty to report is now the police and the duty
to process the said information given by the police and uploaded
on to the website lies on the Tribunal. When access is given to the
Tribunal to an FIR and the other details which have been
uploaded by the police the claimant need not be made to run
around or suffer from a fear that his petition is barred by time. It
is the duty of the Claims Tribunal to access the information
available to it and process the claim and give succour to the
victims. It is not an advisorial system as was practiced before
01.04.2022 other parts of India (before 12.09.1979 in Tamil Nadu)
but today it is a people oriented justice delivery Tribunal.
21.It is seen that the police is required to prefer an Accident
Information Report and furnish the information with the
jurisdictional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and other
Stakeholders are specified. It is here that the compilation made
ready by the Hon'ble Mr.Justice J.R.Midha (Retd) presently Senior
Advocate of the Supreme Court of India become relevant.
22.For the ready understanding, I am extracting the new
timelines that have come under the Central Motor Vehicles Act,
2022.
“9. The time lines prescribed by the Central Motor
Vehicles Rules, 2022 for expeditious adjudication of
motor accident claims are as under:-
i. (i)
The Police has to file
First Accident Report
(FAR) in Form-I before
- Within 48
hours of the
accident
MACT
ii. (ii)
The Driver of the
offending vehicle has to
submit the Driver’s
Form-III to the Police
- Within 30
days of the
accident
iii. (iii)
The Owner of the
offending vehicle has to
submit the Owner’s
Form-IV to the Police
- Within 30
days of the
accident
iv. (iv)
The Police, on
verification of the
Driver’s and Owner’s
Forms, has to submit
Interim Accident Report
(IAR) in Form-V before
MACT
- Within 50
days of the
accident
10.The Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 2022 incorporated the
flowchart of the Scheme framed by Delhi High Court in Rajesh
Tyagi’s Case which is reproduced hereunder:-
23.Taking note of this development in Gohar Mohammed v.
Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation and others in
S.L.P.(C).No.32448 of 2018, the Supreme Court was pleased to
hold as follows:
“29. As per the Rules, in the event of a road
accident, the investigation must be started immediately
on receipt of information by the police officer 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 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 hospital and shall conduct spot enquiry
examining the eyewitnesses/bystanders. The intimation
regarding the accident is required to be furnished by
Investigating Officer within 48 hours to the Claims
Tribunal in the shape of First Accident Report (FAR) in
FormI. It is further required to be sent to the Nodal
Officer of the insurance company on having particulars of
the insurance policy. The injured/victim(s), legal
representative(s), State Legal Services Authority, insurer
shall also be provided the copy of FormI 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/victim(s)/legal representative(s)
regarding their rights by supplying FormII attaching flow
chart within 10 days specifying the scheme to seek
remedial measure. It would be the duty of the
Investigating Officer to ask the information in FormIII
and FormIV from the driver(s) and the owner(s)
respectively within 30 days. As per the new regime, on
receiving the information, Interim Accident Report (IAR)
shall be submitted by the Investigating Officer 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)/claimant(s), State Legal Services Authority,
insurer and General Insurance Council. The
Investigating Officer 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 duty
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 FormVI. FormVIA is
modulated to the minor children, who are in need of care
and protection in terms of the Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
31.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
registering authority is duty bound to verify the licence of
driver, fitness and permit of the vehicle(s) involved in the
accident and shall supply such information within 15
days to the Investigating Officer. Similarly, for the
purpose of issuance of medico legal report or the postmortem
report, the hospital is required to furnish such
information to the Investigating Officer within 15 days.
32.The Investigating Officer shall within 90
days compile all relevant documents and material in
the form of Detailed Accident Report (DAR) in
F orm V II accompanying site plan Form V III,
m echanical inspection report Form I X , verification
r eport Form X and the report under S ection 173 C ode
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. 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
victim(s) have suffered grievous injuries and are
undergoing continuous treatment. Thus, the
Investigating Officer shall furnish FAR within 48
hours, IAR within 50 days, complete the
investigation within 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. Amendment Act, the Officer Incharge
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. As per Rules, the failure to
perform the duties by the police officer may entail severe
consequences as envisaged under the provisions of the
State Police Act. 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.”
24.A perusal of the rules, the Judgment of the Supreme
Court and the timeline which has been set forth above would
clearly show that, the claim petition need not be commenced
only by way of presentation of the petition under Section 166.
This is clear from Section 166(4) which states that a report filed by
the police to the concerned Authorities including the
stakeholders, Insurance Companies and the jurisdictional Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal should be treated as the Claim
Petition.
25.During the course of arguments, I asked the learned
Amicus Curiae if there being no bar under Section 166(3)
excluding the application of Limitation Act, whether Section 29(2)
of the Limitation Act can be applied and Section 5 of the Act to be
introduced for the purpose of condonation of delay. I asked this
question because I could not imagine that under the
constitutional governance which has been placed from
26.01.1950, the State which promises Justice - Socio, Economic
and political, can be even more harsh than the colonial legislation
under Section 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act of 1939.
26.The learned Amicus Curiae drew my attention to the two
Judgments of the Kerala High Court in (i)Vimala Jose v.
Aboobacker and two others in O.P.(MAC) No.136 of 2022 dated
02.12.2022 and (ii)Akshay Raj v. Ministry of Law and Justice
Legislative Department rep. By the Secretary, IV Floor, A Wing,
Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi in O.P.(MAC) No.6 of 2023 dated
23.01.2023 and pointed out that Section 5 was made applicable by
the Kerala High Court but their operation has been kept in
abeyance by the Supreme Court of India. Since the issue is
pending before the Supreme Court of India though I prima facie
wanted to adopt the view taken by the Kerala High Court in
Akshay Raj's case, I am refraining from to do so.
27.The Parliament in its wisdom has ensured that the
hapless victims of motor accidents need not depend upon
stakeholders in Court for the purpose of initiation of proceedings.
The proceeding itself is initiated on the basis of the report filed by
the Police Authorities. In effect, the petition under Section 166 is
only a reminder to the Court that the police have already filed the
Detailed Accident Report containing all the requisite details like
the First Information Report, Interim Accident Report, First
Accident Report and therefore, it has to take up the said report as
a claim petition. In other words, the claim petition is only a
reminder to the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal to perform its
duty under Rule 21 Annexure XIII of Central Motor Vehicles
Rules and to process the claim petition.
28.In view of the above discussion, it is clear that in cases
where any request is filed and accessible by the Tribunal, then
there will be no question of six months limitation arising. The
issue of six months limitation will arise only in case where no FIR
has been registered by the Police and no report has been
sent/uploaded.
29.The members of the Bar represented that the Police are
not sending the report and hence, there arises a problem.
30.A reading of Section 166(4) shows that if any report of the
accident is forwarded to it under Section 159, the same shall be treated
as an application for compensation. It is no more the discretion of
the police. Rule 4(A)(5)(1) of the Tamil Nadu Rules read with the
Central rules make it mandatory. It has now become a statutory
duty of the Police to sent a report. It is pertinent to point out that
the amendment under Section 166(4) does not speak about the
Interim Accident Report (IAR), First Accident Report (FAR) and
Detailed Accident Report (DAR) but speaks about “any report that
has been sent by the police”. Therefore, even if an FIR sent by the
police to the Tribunal, the same should be treated a Claim
Petition.
31.The upshot of the discussion is that on registration of an
FIR, a claimant is entitled to present the petition without the fear
of it being thrown out, on the ground of limitation. This would
be the correct reading of the present legal dispensation in all cases
where FIR is registered within six months, of the date of any
motor accident which takes place after 01.04.2022.
32.Consequently, applying the Law discussed above to the
facts of the present case, this Civil Revision petition is allowed.
The FIR having been registered, in this case, within two days
from the date of the accident on 13.10.2022 by Oragadam Police
Station, the petition filed in M.A.C.T.O.P.(SR).No.3280 of 2023
has to only be treated as a reminder to the Court to call for the
FIR and other reports and register the same as a Claim Petition.
Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. The
Order passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is
set aside and a direction shall be issued to treat the application
filed on 19.04.2023 as a reminder to the Court for a plea of just
compensation under 166(4) and take up the application for trial.
No comments:
Post a Comment