Special Leave Petition Civil No 4120 of 1978
From the Judgment and Order dated 8 3 78 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Revision No 80176
Prem Malhotra and M N Shroff for the Petitioner
The Order of the Court was delivered by KRISHNA IYER J We refuse leave but with a message tag
The poor shall not be priced out of the justice market by insistence on court fee and refusal to apply the exemptive provisions of 185 Order XXXIII CPC
So we are distressed that the State of Haryana mindless of the mandate of equal justice to the indigent under the Magna Carta of our Republic expressed in Article 14 and stressed in article 39A of the Constitution has sought leave to appeal against the order of the High Court which has rightly extended the pauper  provisions to auto accident claims
The reasoning of the High Court in holding that Order XXXIII will apply to tribunals which have the trappings of the civil court finds our approval
We affirm the decision
Even so it is fair for the State to make clear the situation by framing appropriate rules to exempt from levy of court fee cases of claims of compensation where automobile accidents are the cause
Here is a case of a widow and daughter claiming compensation for the killing of the sole bread winner by a State Transport bus and the Haryana Government instead of acting on social justice and generously settling the claim fights like a cantankerous litigant even by avoiding adjudication through the device of asking for court fee from the pathetic plaintiffs
Two principles are involved
Access to court is an aspect of Social Justice and the State has no rational litigation policy if it forgets this fundamental
Our perspective is best projected by Cappelletti quoted by the Australian Law Reform Commission The right of effective access to justice has emerged with the new social rights
Indeed it is of paramount importance among these new rights since clearly the enjoyment of traditional as well as new social rights presupposes mechanisms for their effective protection
Such protection moreover is best assured by a workable remedy within the framework of the judicial system
Effective access to justice can thus be seen as the most basic requirement the most basic human right  of a system which purports to guarantee legal right
1 We should expand the jurisprudence of Access to Justice as an integral part of Social Justice and examine the constitutionalism of court fee levy as a facet of human rights highlighted in our Nation s Constitution
If the State itself should travesty this basic principle in the teeth of Articles 14 and 39A where an indigent widow is involved a second look at its policy is overdue
The Court must give the benefit of doubt against levy of a price to enter the temple of justice 186 until one day the whole issue of the validity of profit making through sale of civil justice disguised as court fee is fully reviewed by this Court
Before parting with this point we must express our poignant feeling that no State it seems has as yet framed rules to give effect to the benignant provision of legal aid to the poor in Order XXXIII Rule 9A Civil Procedure Code although several years have passed since the enactment
Parliament is stultified and the People are frustrated
Even after a law has been enacted for the benefit of the Poor the State does not bring into force by wilful default in fulfilling the conditio sine qua non
It is a public duty of each great branch of Government to obey the rule of law and uphold the tryst with the Constitution by making rules to effectuate legislation meant to help the poor
The second principle the State of Haryana has unhappily failed to remember is its duty under article 41 of the Constitution to render public assistance without litigation in cases of disablement and undeserved want
It is a notorious fact that our highways are graveyards on a tragic sale what with narrow neglected roads reckless unchecked drivers heavy vehicular traffic and State Transport buses often inflicting the maximum casualties
Now that insurance against third party risk is compulsory and motor insurance is nationalised and transport itself is largely by State Undertakings the principle of no fault liability and on the spot settlement of claims should become national policy
The victims as here are mostly below the poverty line and litigation is compounded misery
Hit and run cases are common and the time is ripe for the court to examine whether no fault liability is not implicit in the Motor Vehicles Act itself and for Parliament to make law in this behalf to remove all doubts
A long ago Report of the Central Law Commission confined to hit and run cases of auto accidents is gathering dust
The horrendous increase of highway casualties and the chronic neglect of rules of road safety constrains us to recommend to the Central Law Commission and to Parliament to senitize this tragic area of tort law and overhaul it humanistically
Another aspect must be noticed before we part with this petition
In many States for want of judicial manpower or other pathological causes the accident claims pend before tribunals in heartless slowness
Courts must give this bleeding class of cases high priority adopt simplified procedures without breach of natural justice try out pre trial settlements and narrow down the controversy and remember that wiping every tear from every eye  has judicial relevance
For law must keep its promise to Justice
187 While we dismiss the petition for leave we hope the Haryana State will hasten to frame rules under the Motor Vehicles Act to enable claimants for compensation to be free from payment of court fee
MR Petition dismissed


Summary:
The respondents a widow and her daughter claimed compensation for the killing of their sole bread winner by a Haryana State Transport bus but could not afford to pay any court fee on their claim
The High Court held that the exemptive provisions of Order XXXIII CPC will apply to Accident Claims Tribunals which have the trappings of the Civil Court
Dismissing the special leave petition the Court  HELD The State should frame appropriate rules to exempt from levy of court fee cases of claims of compensation where automobile accidents are the cause
Two principles are involved
Firstly access to court is an integral part of social justice and the State has no rational litigation policy if it forgets this fundamental and secondly it is the State s duty under article 41 of the Constitution to render assistance without litigation in cases of disablement and undeserved want
185 B C D 186 C M Cappelletti Rabels Z 1976 669 at 672 quoted with approval
Obiter dictum I
It is a public duty of each great branch of Government to obey the rule of law and uphold the tryst with the Constitution by making rules to effectuate legislation meant to help the poor
Now that insurance against third party risk is compulsory and motor insurance is nationalised and transport itself is largely by State Undertakings the principle of no fault liability and on the spot settlement of claims should become national policy
186 B C D E II
Courts must give the accident claims cases high priority adopt simplified procedures without breach of natural justice try out pre trial settlements and narrow down the controversy and remember that wiping every tear from every eye  has judicial relevance
For law must keep its promise to justice
186 G H