"^ j<-.p-\s" •?y ^l XN; BiS HISH S0 R'E O? ,roX2@ATUSE AI BXIASPtIR <e.G.). M.A. N0. ^5^ /20@4 @ ' <2, ABPB-IAMTS ^PESSSNTS » ^l. Vimala Bai aged 38 years, widow of Cihhabilal. 2. Sunifeira Kumsri, minor tshrough mother Vtmaia Bai, widow ss£ GShhabllal. 3. NanM Bai aged 60 years Wd/o. Mahe-titar Sidar. All R/o. Masiiiya Tah. & Distt, Janjgir-ehampa. VERSETS RE^>ONDENtS NQN-APPEICANTS 1. Paana laal S/o Bhujbal GSh®ahan, S./ia. She®.!rinaTayan,.ay.strl.Gt ffanJgiF- £toanpa» , 2»- Pukhraj fl'ain S/o nofeltaown, B/o. Tyanspert Nagar, Tah. & Bist-b. .-^s^"^lc:°;l:,,. ,'^.*»''l>°".''!t\i.N*<'"\ 3. New Xadia iDsuFanse eamganyLtd. ^'. .<~w''^^c^-/\' fl^ -- - •_- •,..•-•' ~ -.' ^ Korba , Tah. & Bist.fe. Korba. t-t:,T%^T^;VA<& v,^""". \.>^' 4. , Salab Ohand iTain S/o. note known e/e. Piikhraj iTain,' B/o. Transpert Nagar, Kos-ba , lrah.& DisferJ.at Korba (G.G.)» v ABPEAL UMEBK^ O^KDSK.,43. iaj&B,:,l._ 6fl;e;.R.^_B<?W . 1'73.: H.V>AeT.. mGH COURT QF CHHAmSGABH, BILASPOR DB: HON'BLB I.IU, QUDDIISI & HON'BLE N.K. AfiAKWAL, JJ M. A; No. 453 of 3004 Vs. APPEyURANCE: Mrs. H. V. sharma, couBselfixPtllE appellaitts. MT. Suml Sahu, couiHetfcr respcmdelrts I, 2 & 4. Mr. H B.;Agiawal,^&. Advoeate^^ w^ Meera Jaiswal, cpuiiselfiMTespoiulje'iitDO.S. PCTI.M.QUDDUSI.J, ORDERIORALl (08.11.2010) 01. •^ 02. This appeal Iias beett^filed agauMt the inipygnediorder dated 28.01,2004 passed by flie Addl. Motor Accidents Claims Tnbunal, Korba, in M.J.C. No.l 1/2002 dismissmg the applicatibnofttieappellantuiiderOrderORuleQofC.P.C. The brief facts of fhe case are fhat a clatm pctition was filed before the MACT concemed by the widow, pareuts and minor dau^hter of the deceased CIihabilal who died ifi. a laotoraysideiit. The saine was disimssed for noai-appealaiice of the learaed couusel^appcaruig for fhe claimants on 19.12.2000. Thereaflei^ an applicadon ^ res^^ filed on 11.11.2p02 by ai>pellaiit^:no.raljm^-with pTajter for G6ndoiiatjoaofdelayinSliQg|tfaeapplicatto 'Fhe'eausewas .ineittioDfid thaf iu the Ineaittiilie 'befiMre fhe disimssal bfthe claim. petition, fhc father-ia-law offtie widow ofthe deceased !!.'.»^uuufui'ust.ia-nj«!!WWW!.s'*'l..i^! .rfi l^H"-'n^^&HnvNuw4=»cs<iihi,Afle> ? APPELLANTS Biiaala Bai and oihcrs RESPONDBNTS Paima Lal aad ofhers iii!i-i;L,..ii..iy.,,,.» namely Mahettar has died and fhe entire fanuly reiiiamed ia a distress cbridition fherefore, they could not contact the coiunsel aad fpr fhe first tim.e when they came to know on 11.11.2002 about fhe disinissaloffhe claun, they filed the appUcation for restoration. Besides ttus, aa affidavit was also filed by the widdw of the deceased Ghhabilal. The fafher of deceased naniely Mahettar was also a party ia the claun petition. Siut. NanJd Bai, widow oflate Mahtar Ram filed an affidavit thather husband diedon 27.02.2001 aad she along-withher daughter-ui-law (appeUant no. 1) aad herlate husband had filed fhe c]aun petition. for eoinpensation under Motor Vehicles Act 03. The leamed Tribunal disrtussed fhe applicatiou for restoratk>n luider QrdeT 9 Ruli& 9 CPG on fhe gTOUnd fhat ia fhe applicatioii, it was laehtioned that fa.thjer-in-law of appeBant no.l iiamely Mahettar died before fhe disHussal of fhe claun petition in default However,he had igaored the afiBdavit filed by auother claiinant Naiiki Bai inother of fhe deceased Clihabilal who diedia fhe accideut. It appears fhat ia drafting of the appUcation, fh.ere was a luistake to the ; efiect that after fhc words "qg fi? fSTERT f^-lf^ ig-12--200i(» q»t ^" laefore' (^ was mentioil^. Ifit woiiM^te •• ^ •:.. , : . /•-; L ,:..•:,,:•:.:-_ .;. ^ •:;'^' . •.1:\,' written "aftei^ (4MI^ m place of^efbi^ (^, ffie ii^^ would have been that ftie claua petiUon was dismissed for non-prosecution cm 19.12.2000 aBdthjefathei^ia-law of appellaat BO.I died on 27.0;2.2001 ffiat is afler about two s. months and abo it wasiueBrtioned fhM the applicante could not contact fhcu- couuseF-ia betweeh that is fbom the date of ^ ^ If ^.•AA'i'AM&yi y 1 ^ii '"'<(•. disinissal of the claim petition tiU fhey got laiowledge abbiit thedismissalQfiheolamtpetition. - 04. Here it is aecessary to conslder fhe provisJDns of sub-section (6) bfseGtion 158 readwitfa sub-section (4)-ofsection 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Section 158.crf the ^t pio^ {or production of certain certificates, liceuce aad permit in eertain caseg. Iiisub-seeti0ri(6)thereof,itisprovidedthatas soon as any infonaation regarcliag aay accident involving death oi' bodily iajury^ itjo any person is recorded br report under ttus sectioifcis cpiupleted by a polfce ofBcer, the pfBcer inchai^ of fhe polite statioa shaU ^ fi^^ copy of fhe same witfiin fhiity da^ fix^ date of recdrding of io&ynitatis>n or, as fbssea^ Taay ^ such report to ttifi Claims^Tiibtmatbaymgju^ and a copy thereof to the cpnGeriiai insurer, and wfaere a copy is made available to the pwner/ he shaU also wifhin tfairty days of iscsipt of suGb iepart, &viwald (he saine te> suGh Claiius Tribunal arid Insurer. Section 166 provides &r appUcation for compensation. Sub-sectkm (4) of section;I66 provides fhat tfae Claims Tribunal stiaU treat aay report of accidents forwarded to |it uiuier'sub-sectipa (6) of scction 158 as an applicalion ^ conipehsatiDn^^^ Moto^;Velucles Act / . '• -':.:.'':: .: ••••' ...:" .'•• '••'.• ' • ;'.. ..' '••;" '' '..;•'.."••..'... . ••: •••^•:^.. -'. -:•• ..; - It lias also to be noticed. that then; is no VvmtscltKss.Sca' fiTing the claun pefition before the Tribunal. 05. Ia viiew! of the above a^ intenti6n;of ttie tegislattir^ j" " tfae repcirt iinder sub-secti^; (6) of sectioui 15^ would be treafi^ as clami petrtion.^ 'Hnder su^ of |section \ •jaqiiititifWtStio s(t (q paidis3aFaq;ppio:qs tiopiiad (mB[? ^ IBIR awnndo »(Bjp s^^^^ JO t[tB3p JO SJBP 9W rt3Al8 pBiq: oqM. ftB[iqBqqo pasBasiap jo jgq^oni) reg TSIII8N .^snnBa i •oa^CTB^addBjo M^^'^tgq^o'ra: si oqM syaBititBp 3tp JQ sao Aq pg[g iiABp@8 gip pa-toaSt 4l[8t0^ ssq iBiinquj, aiR 'SSBO ^u^sai aig TCI •uop^sd mtBp?' .ifare ag 1.0U 6p s^uBOTidds afpji naAa itot^ad uireio jo aoi^B.itsiSai •loj AiTOUj.toddo asAiS ssq JISSI.T amT8iS^yi aip 'suoistAcud pauot^Tiaixi SAOqB aq^ japun SB suoitR.ad TOTBIO aq^ Suuoisai iit {aiaqi[ aq ppioqs {Bunquj, SER q}. isaj OSIB SAV •aoopad TCIIB(3 3Tp TH 8yiIBtHIBI3 SB pS^al). 3q'[(Bqs pttB SlUBpTt^ap anxoosq ^vui sfWBVOtBp jaq^q 3Tp '83i(oa paAraoax si s^TtemiBio aq^joXue SSBO ui istp uoTiuaTO ot ajaq^asupjad os^e si n •e^itBaitsi.:) Satpnpai sari.iBd aq^ 01 papiBAB aq l[Bqs piBaq Saoqjo ^TTrrq.coctd.o UB pnB Axtnbua ire ^onpaoo o}. si tBimquj, SUIIB[O aqi ^TBO ggi aoitoas jo (^) nopoas -qne .[3pnnnoT^snadiiio3—tojuoi^3iiddBUBSB paiBai^ ST 8ST aoitoas jo (9) aot^oas-qns japim. panrorqns Ijodar 3T[t 'UOT^RSd TOIBIO SV p3J3VS6ai SI V.O&XI 3q}. Jt 'UOTUldo jno u{ -^snf aq o^ ^T o» S-iBaddB qoiqA iiOR.BSiiadtiioo jo tunoutB axp guiui.uua^ap PIBMB WB 33[BTII jfetEI £91 nopoas jo sixoisu.o.id aq^ cq zoafqns pire nitB[3 aip OtTti Aqmbut TXB p[oq 'pjBSq Siitaqjo jifpirq.ioddo Tre (lainsui aip Saipnptti) s3o.tBd stp 8uuuS jaye i^BTts TBtm.qtij, stmBto STR '99T s/n spevi aoT^Bsaatitiioo joj uoflB3T(ddB TIB Jo tdTsaai uo ^Bip sapiAOid tav sg(OTTt3A -loio^ aTp. jo 891 iioTtoas •StHBtaieio axy. ^q xiosiad TH jo 3)BOOApB HB qSnojqt uoT^p.ad niiBio •B 3[g o^ i[3A3 pasix ou SBA axatp vecQ ^T laaj 3A '991 b '^ 06. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in a recent decisipn in Jai Prakash -ws- N^ional Insuraace Compaay Limited reported in (2010) 2 SCC 607 observed fhat proeedural delays in. adjudication/settlement of clauhs by Clauns Tribunals cause hardstup to victims or faiiulies of deceased; JJr -• .• . . . '. ;- aad absence ofia-built safeguards may cause a lai^e chunk of compensation ataount fb be fritfered away by relatives, agents or touts due to ignoiaBce, illiteracy aad susceptibility to exploitation ofvic-tims or their fanulies. Therefore, in the said case, theSupreine Court has given directions to Steition House Officers for implcinentation of section 158(6) aad to Directors General to issue iastructions to prosecute drivers and owneis oftuiiasiired velucles u/s 196. The Registrars General bfHigh Courts Iiave also been directed to iastnict Glaims l^bui^ to register accident information reportsreceivedundersection 158(6) as appUcations for com.peusation u/s 166(4) and deal with theni without waitmg for filtag of claim applications by victuas or fanuly iiienibers and to ensure ayailability of registers, fonas, etc., to Tribunals. Certam. duectious bave alsobeen givento fhe Clauns Tribimals vide Paras 21 & 22 which reads as -under: 21. /'For cxmiplyiag wifh Section 166(4) of "thc Act, the .jurisdictional Motor AccBlents daims Tl-ibuiials shaU iDitiate the following steps: (a) Tfae 'I^un^ sllatt ;m^^ •'\.:^-'.'-":...-::'^ '.'...• "..:•'.' ;'. .: ' ; ....;-;'', •• .; iastitutioa i^gister fiJETBObrding fheAAIRs Iwluch areireceivi^ Bp6iiffi?'the5Statioff Ho^ thfil PoUce' Statiens aad^^^^^^ ^^ i iDjscellaneoiis ^petitioDS. If any IpFivateiClamt ,A^ ./ '\ ^c"^ teg^rs petitions are directly filed with reference to aa AIR.they shouM also be recorded in the register. (b) The Tribunal shafl Ust fhe AIRs as nusceUaaeous petitions. It^shaU fix a date for prelimuiaiy heanng so as to enable the poUce to notify such date to the victim (fanuly of fhe victim in. the eyent of death) aa<f-ihe owner, driver aad iusurer of fhe vehicle involved ia the accident. . Once fhe clatmant(s) appear, the iniscelteiieous appUcation shaU be coiiverted to claita petition. Where a elaimant(s) file the claim petitiou even befoye fhe receipt oftheAIR by fhLC Tnbunal, the AIR may be ta^ged to fhe claim petition. (c) The Tribunal shaU enquire and satis^ itse]f fbat the AIR relates to a real accident aad is not ffae result of any collusion and fabncation of an aecident (by any ''poU.ce of&cer-advocate-doGtQr? iiexus, wtu.ch Uas coiae to light iaseveral cases). (d) The Tnbuaal shall by a summaiy enquiry ascertain the dependent family mcmbers/legal Iieirs. The jiirisdictional police shan also enquire and subxm.t the Dflm.es offhe dependentlegallieirs. (e) The Tribulial ShaU categorise the claim cases registered, intb fhose where the iasurer disputes liabilUy and fhose where the insurerdoes notdispute the liabilily. (f) WIieiever the insurer does aot dispute the liabiltty •uiuler fhe ;p61fcy, the Tribunal shall inak'e an endeavour to determine fhe coiupelisation amount by a sumaiaiy enquiry or refer the matter tp fhe Lok Adalat for settlement, sb as tj£>;disposeoffhe elaiui pethaon itseU; withia a time frarne DDt eSaseedin® six inonfhs from the date ofregisteatioii ofthe claim. petition. .>a-i2:y;-' ~^f^^i.^.\^ 7 (^ The Iiisurance Coinpaiues shatl be directed to deposit the admitted amouat or fhe amount determiued, witti the Claims Tnbunals withiu 30 days ofdeterminaUon. The Tnbiuials should easure fhat fhe coiupensatioa aniount is kept in a fixed deposit aud disbursed as per fhe dfa^ections contained m. Kerala SRTC Vs. SusharmnjaThomas. (h) As the proceedings initiated iu pursuance of sections 158(6) aad 166(4) ofthe Act are different in nature froin an appUcation by fhe victun(s) u/s 166(1) oftheAct, Section 170 wiU not apply. The insurers wiU fh.erefore be entitted to assist fhe Tribuxial (eifher iadependently orwith fhe owners offhc vehicles) to veri^r the correctaess in. regard to the accident, uijuries, age, iucom.e and depeudaate of flie deceased victim. ao.d in determining fhe quaiituuiofcoin.pensation. 22. The aforesaid directioas to fhe Tiibunals, are wifhout prejudice to fhe discretion pfeach Tribunal to foBow sucli suminaiy procedure as it deeais fit as provided under section 169 of fhe Act Many Tribunals iustead pf holdiag au incpury iato fhe claim by &Uowuig suitable suiuiuaty procedure, as laaadatedbysections 168 and 169 offheAct.tend to eonduct aiotor accideat cases Uke regular oivil suits. This shotdd be avoided. TUe Tribunfll shaU. takE an active role in deciding aad expeditious s / dteposal of the applicatioiis ibr compeasatioa and make efifectiye use of seetion 165 of the Evideiice Act, 1872 to determiae Uiejust coiapenSation. ..^- . . Inviewoffhfiabove.discussibD^weaBdwtfaisappeal^ ^side the order dated 19;12.2000 disinissmg the claim petilion in defaiilt witli a duectiou: fhat fhe claim petitjon shatt l?e restorad to its original luliaber and shaU bettecidri :T;? I— '\,^-^ ^^^•^^ Rao « at fhe eadiest in accordance witb law. Sidce fhe parties are represented here, thcy are directed to appear before fhe MACT concemed on 22nd November, 2010. The records of fhe Clauns Tnbuiial sbaU be scnt back forthwith. No order .as to cost(s). Sd/- I.M.Quddiisi 3udge Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge ;'"\' liilir