Full Judgment Text
$~2 to 10
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
% Date of decision: 14 May, 2024
2
+ C.R.P. 153/2022 & CM APPL. 42513/2022
NARENDRA GUPTA & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr.Anil Goel, Mr.Pranjal
Sharma and Mr.Aditya Goel,
Advocates.
versus
PARAMJIT SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Pankaj Gupta, Advocate.
3
+ C.R.P. 154/2022 & CM APPL. 42515/2022
REKHA GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Anil Goel, Mr.Pranjal
Sharma and Mr.Aditya Goel,
Advocates.
versus
PARAMJIT SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Pankaj Gupta, Advocate.
4
+ C.R.P. 155/2022 & CM APPL. 42517/2022
JAGRIT GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Anil Goel, Mr.Pranjal
Sharma and Mr.Aditya Goel,
Advocates.
versus
PARAMJIT SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Pankaj Gupta, Advocate.
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 1 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
5
+ C.R.P. 156/2022 & CM APPL. 42519/2022
HARISH GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Anil Goel, Mr.Pranjal
Sharma and Mr.Aditya Goel,
Advocates.
versus
PARAMJIT SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Pankaj Gupta, Advocate.
6
+ C.R.P. 157/2022 & CM APPL. 42521/2022
NARENDRA GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Anil Goel, Mr.Pranjal
Sharma and Mr.Aditya Goel,
Advocates.
versus
PARAMJIT SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Pankaj Gupta, Advocate.
7
+ C.R.P. 158/2022 & CM APPL. 42526/2022
ANKITA GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Anil Goel, Mr.Pranjal
Sharma and Mr.Aditya Goel,
Advocates.
versus
PARAMJIT SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Pankaj Gupta, Advocate.
8
+ C.R.P. 159/2022 & CM APPL. 42530/2022
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 2 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
MITHLESH GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Anil Goel, Mr.Pranjal
Sharma and Mr.Aditya Goel,
Advocates.
versus
PARAMJIT SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Pankaj Gupta, Advocate.
9
+ C.R.P. 160/2022 & CM APPL. 42532/2022
PRIYA GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Anil Goel, Mr.Pranjal
Sharma and Mr.Aditya Goel,
Advocates.
versus
PARAMJIT SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Pankaj Gupta, Advocate.
10
+ C.R.P. 161/2022 & CM APPL. 42534/2022
ANMOL GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Anil Goel, Mr.Pranjal
Sharma and Mr.Aditya Goel,
Advocates.
versus
PARAMJIT SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Pankaj Gupta, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA
DHARMESH SHARMA, J. (ORAL)
1. This common order shall decide the above noted civil revision
petitions instituted by the above noted petitioners under Section 115 of
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 3 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
1
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 assailing the impugned order dated
26.04.2022 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Motor Accident
2
Claims Tribunal-01, Tis Hazari Courts, Central District, Delhi
whereby each of the above noted claim petitions filed by the claimants
3
in terms of Section 166 read with Section 140 of MV Act has been
dismissed on the ground that the version of the accident as pleaded in
the claim petitions is doubtful and also for non-compliance of Section
158(6) of the MV Act. Each of the above noted petitions raises
common questions of law and facts and can be conveniently disposed
of together.
2. It would be appropriate to clarify that C.R.P. No.153/2022 is a
claim petition which has been filed by the husband and two children
of the deceased Smt.Geeta Devi whereas each of the other claim
petitions are filed seeking compensation for the injuries suffered in the
accident.
3. Shorn of unnecessary details, each of the claimants are
members of the same family who were travelling in the offending bus
bearing registration No. UP-17AT-4406, from Red Fort, Delhi at
around 10.50 PM to Amritsar.
4. Since, the facts and circumstances of the case are common in
each of the claim petitions, thus for a common decision on the instant
civil revision petitions, C.R.P. No.153/2022 is reckoned to be the lead
case. It would be apposite to refer to the impugned order dated
1
CPC
2
Presiding Officer
3
Motor Vehicles Act
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 4 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
26.04.2022 in toto so as to understand the background of the present
civil revisions:
“(1) The present claim petition has been filed in respect of an
accident which took place on 13.07.2019 at 2:45 PM near Rakba
Village Sanwala, GT Road, District Kurukshetra, Haryana.
(2) It is pleaded that on 12.07.2019 the petitioner along with his
other family members boarded a bus bearing No. UP-17AT-4406
from Red Fort, Delhi at around 10:50 PM to Amritsar. It is further
pleaded that the driver of the bus namely Paramjit Singh
(respondent no.1) was driving the said bus rashly, at high speed, in
a zig-zag manner on which the passengers cautioned the
driver to drive the bus carefully and requested him to
follow the traffic guidelines. At about 2:45 AM the respondent
no.1 tried to overtake another vehicle, bumped the bus to the side
of the curb and into the railing of the divider of the road as a result
of which the bus over-turned. While the passengers were trying
hard to evacuate, suddenly the bus caught fire and Smt. Geeta Devi
got burnt alive and expired at the spot itself whereas the other
passengers suffered grievous injuries in the accident. Pursuant to
the accident, an FIR No. 306/2019 under Sections
279/304-A/337/338 IPC PS Thanesar Sadar, Kurukshetra was
registered.
(3) It is evident from the record that the respondent no.1
Paramjit Singh (Driver of the offending vehicle) is a resident of
VPO Jhanjoti, Tehsil Ajnala, Amritsar-143001; the respondent
no.2 Mangat Ram Mehta (Owner of the offending vehicle) is a
resident of Village Gurha Singh Chak Shaman,
Jammu-181206 and the office of the respondent no.3
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. is situated at Jammu180001. The
present claim petition has been filed by the petitioner claiming that
he is a resident of Karol Bagh, Delhi falling within the jurisdiction
of this Tribunal.
(4) I may note that the accident in the present case had taken place
on 13.07.2019 whereas the claim petition (incomplete without
material documents) has been filed on 22.04.2022 i.e. after Two
Years and Eleven Months of the accident in question. The certified
copy of the charge-sheet filed before the criminal court at
Kurukshetra, Haryana has not been placed on record. Only
photocopy of the FIR has been filed along with the copies of
Aadhar Card; Driving License of the respondent no.1; copy of
Registration Certificate of offending vehicle; copy of Cover
Note of the Insurance Policy of the offending vehicle; copy of the
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 5 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
medical bills and copy of photographs of the offending vehicle
have been placed on record. There is no information with regard to
any charge-sheet being filed by the investigating agency.
(5) Of late, it has been noticed that some Advocates have started
filing petitions of outstation matters and that too in bulk
before different courts by stretching and expanding the jurisdiction
of Motor Accident Claim Tribunals on the pretext that the office of
the insurance company is situated within the jurisdiction of the
court. In a similar practice, in Uttar Pradesh a large number of
Advocates were found involved in filing of fake claims pleas and
in this regard cognizance was taken by the Hon'ble High Court of
Allahabad against such malpractices and an SIT was constituted to
investigate the fraud and in this regard the case of Shafiq Ahmed
Vs. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Special Leave
Petition (Civil) No. 1110 of 2017, CC No. 23628 of 2016 arising
out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07.10.2015 in
Crime No. 49 of 2015 passed by the Hon'ble Court of Jurisdiction
of Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, is relevant. In the said case the
Hon'ble Supreme Court has taken a note of the Status Report filed
by the SIT in its order dated 16.12.2021 according to which out
of total 1376 cases of suspicious claims received by the
SIT, after completing enquiry of 247 cases of suspicious
claims till date, total 198 accused persons have been
primafacie found guilty of cognizable offence and accordingly total
92 criminal cases have been registered in various districts. In fact
that total 92 criminal cases in various districts have been registered
till date, of which, 28 advocates have been named as accused
persons in 55 cases and Charge Sheets against 11 advocates in 25
cases have been forwarded to the concerned trial Court till date.
(6) In the above case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed
a detailed order dated 05.01.2017 reference of which was also
made in the order dated 16.09.2021 wherein the Hon'ble Apex
Court expressed its serious concerns of the alarming
situation in which fake and fabricated claims may be filed
under Motor Vehicles Act in all States/ Union Territories pursuant
to which directions were issued and the Registrars of all the High
Courts were directed to ascertain from the Motor Accident Claim
Tribunals such doubtful cases which primafacie may require
investigation and to prevent filing of such fabricated cases.
The relevant portion of the same is quoted as under:
“…… From the order passed by the High Court of
Judicature at Allahabad, it was noticed that 64 fake
claim cases were pending in various Districts in the
State of U.P. It was also found and noticed that 29
fake claim cases were decided in which
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 6 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
compensation of Rs. 1.23 Crores has been paid and
claims for over Rs. 6 Crores are still pending. This
Court noted that the situation is really alarming and
similar scenario cannot be ruled out elsewhere in
other States/Union Territories also. Therefore, this
Court directed to issue notice to all the
States/Union Territories and Insurance Companies
as to what steps can be taken to rule out the filing of
the fake cases and what remedial measures can be
taken. This Court also directed to issue notice to all
the High Courts through Registrars to ascertain from
MACTs such doubtful cases which primafacie
may require investigation and to prevent filing
of such fabricated cases….”.
(7) It is necessary to mention here that in the case of Shafiq
Ahmed Vs. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. (Supra)
vide order dated 16.12.2021 the Hon'ble Supreme Court while
dealing with large number of claim petitions involving fraud and
fake claims, has taken a serious note of the malpractices and the
modus-operandi in claim petitions where large scale siphoning
of the insurance amount is involved while instituting fake
compensation petitions, which observations I quote as under:
“..... 7. We have also heard at length Shri Atul
Nanda, learned Senior Advocate and Shri
Vishnu Mehra, learned Advocate appearing on
behalf of the two insurance companies and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
State of Uttar Pradesh/SIT on the modus operandi
of the advocates for filing fake cases under
Motor Vehicles Act and Workmen
Compensation Act. Separate notes have been filed
pointing out the modus operandi in instituting
the fake compensation petitions. Some of the
modus operandi adopted are as under:
i) Non-road accident injury-death converted into
road accident claims;
ii) fraudulent implantation of vehicle;
iii) false implantation of driver;
iv) claimant implantation;
v) multiple claims at various for a at different
territorial locations for compensation out of
injury/ death caused arising out of the same
accident. Often the claim applications are filed
both before various MACT Tribunals as well as
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 7 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
the authorities under the Employees Compensation
Act, 1923;
vi) fake/fabricated insurance policies; and
vii) fake/ fabricated income documents/
medical documents for exaggerated compensation.
7.1 Investigating Officer of SIT has also filed a
short note on modus operandi in instituting fake
compensation petitions, which are based on
rich experience during investigation/
enquiry of the Criminal Cases/ FIRs/ Complaints,
which are as under:
1. CASES OF HIT AND RUN
Such road accidents which are occurred
from unknown vehicles, alleged eyewitnesses are
prepared therein, on the basis of their
affidavit/statements, facts are brought in the
light
showing accident committed by some other insured
vehicle and petition is instituted against
owner/driver/insurance company of the
aforementioned vehicle.
In the cases of such road accident which
have been committed by unknown vehicles, for the
purpose of institution of the compensation
petitions, in a well designed planning,
documents related to vehicle/driver are
obtained from some advocates and documents of
such vehicles/driver used in some other
compensation petitions/cases are used in
institution of false petitions.
Such road accidents which are occurred from
some unknown vehicles, in that accidents are shown
to have been committed by such vehicles which are
old and their vehicle owners remain first registered
owners. Advocates purchase such
aforementioned vehicles as old vehicles, they do not
get such vehicles registered in their own
names whereas the actual/registered owners of
those vehicles have already died.
Despite of death of original owner, fake
General Power of Attorneys are
executed/prepared in the names of such deceased
vehicle owners through their companions
advocates. Aforementioned vehicles are shown
in such road accident, which were occurred from
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 8 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
unknown vehicles. Aforementioned vehicles have
been shown in accident in many such cases and
compensations petitions have been instituted.
In the cases of such road accidents
wherein First Information Reports are registered
against unknown vehicles and when those
unknown vehicles are not traced and local
Investigating Officers submit their Final Report in
the cases before the Hon'ble Courts. In such
accidents if a person has died while travelling in
those vehicles and second person has injured, then
holding that injured person himself to be driver of
the aforementioned vehicle, showing his
negligence, by impleading as opposite party to the
insurance company of his own vehicle for receiving
compensation, compensation petitions
are also filed for receiving amount of compensation.
2. CASES OF KNOWN VEHICLES
WITHOUT INSURANCE
If road accident is occurred with known
vehicle and not insured at that time, in connivance
with owner or driver of other insured vehicle in
place of that vehicle, compensation petitions
are instituted by showing aforementioned road
accident of the said insured vehicle.
3. CASES OF FICTIONAL ACCIDENT
AND FALSE PETITIONS
Such false compensation petitions have also come
into light wherein name and address of the
petitioner could not be ascertained and
imaginary story is created on behalf of such
petitioner and false Claim petitions are instituted.
4. CASES RELATED TO CONNIVANCE
OF VEHICLE OWNER/VEHICLE
DRIVER/ADVOCATE
For the purpose of earning illegal money,
some actual vehicle owners and actual drivers of
vehicles in connivance with advocates, submits
registration certificates of their vehicles and Driver
Licences in the unknown motor accident cases for
filing fake petitions.
5. IMPLEADING NAME AND ADDRESS
OF FAKE PERSONS IN ACTUAL ACCIDENTS
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 9 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
Persons of fake names and addresses
showing as drivers/cleaners in place of actual and
correct injured persons (driver/cleaner) involved
in the actual accident cases,
compensation petitions are instituted in the W.C.A.
courts by showing them injured in the
aforementioned accidents.
6. CASES RELATED TO HANDICAPPED/
DECEASED PERSONS DUE TO OTHER
REASONS
During course of enquiry/investigation, such
fake compensation petitions have also come
into light wherein petitioner has become
handicapped due to some other reason (like
chopping off hand from thrasher machine), and
second copy of fake handicapped certificates of their
being disabled/handicapped obtained again showing
date of accident after date of fake accident and fake
compensation petitions have also been instituted.
Despite not being injured in the road accidents,
after death or injured for any other reasons, his
family members or he himself showing him or
that person to be the driver/cleaner/labourer
who died or injured, compensation petitions are
instituted in fake manner.
7. CASES RELATED TO FILING SAME CASE IN
MORE THAN ONE COURTS
In one road accident, wherein a person has died or
injured, his family members or he himself submits
compensation petition in the M.A.C.T. court related
to aforementioned road accident.
If decision of the court is not in his favour,
then the same petitioner changes the story and
again submits his petition before the W.C.A.
court (Workmen‟s Compensation Act).
After institution of compensation related to a road
accident in a court and after receiving its
compensation amount, again same accident is shown
with other vehicle which is insured with other
insurance company and second Claim petition is
instituted in the W.C.A. court of any other
district for receiving compensation amount again.
8. CASES RELATED TO AFFIXING
PHOTOGRAPH OF A SAME PERSON IN
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 10 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT CHEQUE
DISTRIBUTION REGISTER IN MORE
THAN ONE PETITIONS
Some compensation petitions were instituted in
the W.C.A. Court in the names of different persons.
After judgement of the aforementioned court,
photograph of the same person is affixed in more
than one case/petition, on the Cheque
Distribution Register for receiving cheque related to
compensation amount and compensation amount
was received and thereafter, entire aforementioned
amount was got transferred by the concerned
advocate in his own bank account or in the bank
accounts of his family members.
9. CASES TO GET THE PETITIONS DISMISSED
AFTER TRANSFER OF FAVOURING
DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER,
RESUBMITTING THE PETITIONS AT HIS
NEWLY POSTED PLACE
During investigation/enquiry of the compensation
petitions, it is also found that petitions related to
occurrence of accidents instituted in the W.C.A.
court of concerned District. When Deputy
Labour Commissioner of W.C.A. court of
aforementioned District transferred to some other
district, then some advocates of aforementioned
district get their compensation petitions
dismissed, and thereafter they instituted new
petitions again in aforementioned district where the
then Deputy Labour Commissioner was transferred
by showing fake address in the petitions.
10. INSTITUTION OF PETITIONS IN OTHER
DISTRICT INSTEAD OF INSTITUTING
PETITIONS IN THE DISTRICT OF ACCIDENT
SPOT/PLACE
During investigation/enquiry of the
compensation petitions, it is also found that some
compensation petitions were not instituted in the
court of district of place/spot of accident, rather
they were instituted in the court of other
district by mentioning only temporary address
instead of mentioning original address of the
petitioner. It is also pertinent to mention here
that this temporary address also remains
incomplete.
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 11 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
11. CASES RELATED TO FAKE
VAKALATNAMA
During investigation/enquiry of the
compensation petitions related to road accidents, this
fact has also come into light that actual/main
advocate who has filed the claim petition, does not
submit his own Vakalatnama in the concerned court,
he submits Vakalatnama on behalf of such
Advocate, who does not file the compensation
petitions by mentioning his mobile number on the
compensation petitions.
During investigation/enquiry of the
compensation petitions related to road accidents, this
fact has also come into light that advocate who has
submitted compensation petition in the concerned
court, he mentioned name of such fake person in
place of name of Advocate, whose whereabouts
could not be ascertained. Whereas such case was
pursued by the advocate who submitted this petition
in camouflage manner. ...”.
(8) It cannot be ignored, that it was after the Allahabad High
Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court took cognizance of the fake
and fraudulent claims, that there has been sudden spurt of filing
of claim
petitions in Motor Accident Claim Tribunal in Delhi relating to
accidents which have taken place in other States i.e. Haryana,
Uttar Pradesh etc. It is this which is a serious concern making it
obligatory for the Tribunals in Delhi to carefully scrutinize these
cases so as to rule out any foul play.
(9) In this regard, reference is made to the case of Jai Prakash
Vs. M/s. National Insurance Co. Ltd. reported in 2010 (2) SCC
607 wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has reaffirmed the mandate
of the
statute to be meticulously followed [which has now been
reaffirmed in the case of Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co.
Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors. in Writ Petition (Civil) No.
534/2020 vide orders dated 16.03.2021 & 16.11.2021],
relevant portion of which is quoted as under:
“..... 4.2) The Legislature tried to reduce the
period of pendency of claim cases and
quicken the process of determination of
compensation by making two significant changes
in the Act, by Amendment Act 54 of 1994,
making it mandatory for registration of a
motor accident claim within one month of receipt
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 12 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
of first information of the accident,
without the claimants having to file a claim
petition. Sub-section (6) of section 158 of the Act
provides:
“As soon as any information regarding any
accident involving death or bodily injury to any
person is recorded or report under this section is
completed by a police officer, the
officer-in-charge of the police station shall
forward a copy of the same within thirty
days from the date of recording of
information or, as the case may be, on completion
of such report to the Claims Tribunal
having jurisdiction and a copy thereof to the
concerned insurer, and where a copy is made
available to the owner, he shall also within thirty
days of receipt of such report, forward the
same to such Claims Tribunal and insurer".
Sub-section (4) of Section 166 of the Act reads
thus:- "The Claims Tribunal shall treat any report
of accidents forwarded to it under sub-section (6)
of section 158 as an application for compensation
under this Act".
Rule 150 of Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989
prescribes the form (No.54) of the Police
Report required to be submitted under section
158(6) of the Act. 4.3) This Court in General
Insurance Council v. State of A.P. [2007
(12) SCC 354] emphasised the need for
implementing the aforesaid provisions.
This Court directed:
"It is, therefore, directed that all the State
Governments and the Union Territories shall
instruct all police officers concerned about the
need to comply with the requirement of Section
158(6) keeping in view the requirement indicated
in Rule 150 and in Form 54, Central Motor
Vehicles Rules, 1989. Periodical checking
shall be done by the Inspector General of
Police concerned to ensure that the requirements
are being complied with. In case there is
non-compliance, appropriate action shall be taken
against the erring officials. The Department of
Road Transport and Highways shall make
periodical verification to ensure that action is
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 13 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
being taken and in case of any deviation
immediately bring the same to the notice
of the State Governments/Union Territories
concerned so that necessary action can be
taken against the officials concerned."
4.4) But unfortunately neither the police nor the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals have made
any effort to implement these mandatory
provisions of the Act. If these provisions are
faithfully and effectively implemented, it will be
possible for thevictims of accident and/or their
families to get compensation, in a span of few
months. There is, therefore, an urgent need for
the concerned police authorities and
Tribunals to follow themandate of these
provisions.
Problem (iv)
5. Courts have always been concerned that
the full compensation amount does not reach
and benefit the victims and their families,
particularly those who are uneducated,
ignorant, or not worldly-wise. Unless
there are built-in safeguards they may be
deprived of the benefit of compensation which
may be the sole source of their future sustenance.
This court has time and again insisted upon
measures to ensure that the compensation
amount is appropriately invested and
protected and not frittered away owing to
ignorance, illiteracy and susceptibility to
exploitation. [See Union Carbide Corporation
v. Union of India - 1991 (4) SCC 584 and
General Manager, Kerala State Road
Transport Corporation v. Susamma Thomas -
1994 (2) SCC 176]. But in spite of the directions
in these cases, the position continues to be far
from unsatisfactory and in many cases
unscrupulous relatives, agents and touts are
taking away a big chunk of the compensation, by
ingenious methods. Reports of Amicus Curiae 6.
In this background, to find some
solutions, on 9.9.2008, this Court requested
Shri Gopal Subramaniam, to assist the Court
as Amicus Curiae. The learned amicus curiae
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 14 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
with his usual thoroughness and commitment has
examined the issues and submitted a series of
reports and has also made several suggestions for
consideration. He has also referred to and relied
on a series of zealous directions issued by a
learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court to
expedite and streamline the adjudication of motor
vehicle claims and disbursement of
compensation.
7. Having considered the nature of the problems
and taking note of the several suggestions
made by the learned Amicus Curiae and after
hearing, we propose to issue a set of directions to
the police authorities and Claims Tribunals. We
also propose to make some suggestions for
implementation by Insurance Companies and
some suggestions for the consideration of the
Parliament and the Central Government.
Directions to Police Authorities
8. The Director General of Police of each
State is directed to instruct all Police Stations in
his State to comply with the provisions of
Section 158(6) of the Act. For this
purpose, the following steps will have to be taken
by the Station House Officers of the jurisdictional
police stations:
(i) Accident Information Report in Form No. 54
of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules,1989 (`AIR'
for short) shall be submitted by the police
(Station House Officer) to the jurisdictional
Motor Vehicle Claims Tribunal, within 30 days
of the registration of the FIR. In addition to the
particulars required to be furnished in Form No.
54, the police should also collect and furnish the
following additional particulars in the AIR to the
Tribunal:
(i) The age of the victims at the time of accident;
(ii) The income of the victim;
(iii) The names and ages of the dependent family
members.
(ii) The AIR shall be accompanied by the attested
copies of the FIR, site sketch/
mahazar/photographs of the place of
occurrence, driving licence of the driver,
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 15 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
insurance policy (and if necessary, fitness
certificate) of the vehicle and postmortem
report (in case of death) or the
Injury/Wound certificate (in the case of injuries).
The names/addresses of injured or dependant
family members of the deceased should also be
furnished to the Tribunal.
(iii) Simultaneously, copy of the AIR with
annexures thereto shall be furnished to the
concerned insurance company to enable the
Insurer to process the claim.
(iv) The police shall notify the first date of
hearing fixed by the Tribunal to the victim
(injured) or the family of the victim (in case of
death) and the driver, owner and insurer. If so
directed by the Tribunal, the police may secure
their presence on the first date of hearing.
9. To avoid any administrative difficulties in
immediate implementation of sections 158(6) of
the Act, we permit such implementation to be
carried out in three stages. In the first stage, all
police stations/claims Tribunals in the NCT
Region and State Capital regions shall implement
the provisions by end of April 2010. In the
second stage, all the police stations/claims
Tribunals in district headquarters regions shall
implement the provisions by the end of August
2010. In the third stage, all police stations/Claims
Tribunals shall implement the provisions by the
end of December, 2010. The Director Generals
shall ensure that necessary forms and
infrastructural support is made available to give
effect to Section 158 (6) of the Act.
10. Section 196 of the Act provides that
whoever drives a motor vehicle or causes or
allows a motor vehicle to be driven in
contravention of the provisions of Section
146 shall be punishable with imprisonment
which may be extended to three months, or with
fine which may extend to Rs. 1000/-, or with
both. Though the statute requires prosecution of
the driver and owner of uninsured vehicles, this is
seldom done. Thereby a valuable deterrent is
ignored. We therefore direct the Director
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 16 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
Generals to issue instructions to prosecute drivers
and owners of uninsured vehicles under Section
196 of the Act.
11. The Transport Department, Health
Department and other concerned departments
shall extend necessary cooperation to the
Director-Generals to give effect to Section
158(6).
Directions to the Claims Tribunals 12. The
Registrar General of each High Court is directed
to instruct all Claims Tribunals in his
State to register the reports of accidents
receive under Section 158 (6) of the Act as
applications for compensation under Section 166
(4) of the Act and deal with them without
waiting for the filing of claim applications
by the injured or by the family of the deceased.
The
Registrar General shall ensure that necessary
Registers, forms and other support is extended to
the Tribunal to give effect to Section 166 (4) of
the Act.
13. For complying with section 166(4) of the
Act, the jurisdictional Motor Accident Claims
Tribunals shall initiate the following steps:
(a) The Tribunal shall maintain an Institution
Register for recording the AIRs which are
received from the Station House Officers of the
Police Stations and register them as
miscellaneous petitions. If any private
claim petitions are directly filed with reference
to an AIR, they should also be recorded in the
Register.
(b) The Tribunal shall list the AIRs as
miscellaneous petitions. It shall fix a date for
preliminary hearing so as to enable the police to
notify such date to the victim (family of victim in
the event of death) and the owner, driver and
insurer of the vehicle involved in the accident.
Once the claimant/s appear, the
miscellaneous application shall be converted to
claim petition. Where a claimant/s file the
claim petition even before the receipt of the
AIR by the Tribunal, the AIR may be tagged to
the claim petition.
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 17 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
(c) The Tribunal shall enquire and satisfy itself
that the AIR relates to a real accident and is not
the result of any collusion and fabrication of
an accident (by any `Police Officer -
Advocate – Doctor' nexus, which has come to
light in several cases).
(d) The Tribunal shall by a SUMMARY
ENQUIRY ascertain the dependent family
members/legal heirs. The jurisdictional police
shall also enquire and submit the names
of the dependent legal heirs.
(e) The Tribunal shall categories the claim cases
registered, into those where the insurer disputes
liability and those where the insurer does not
dispute the liability.
(f) Wherever the insurer does not dispute the
liability under the policy, the Tribunal shall make
an endeavour to determine the compensation
amount by a summary enquiry or refer the matter
to the Lok Adalat for settlement, so as to dispose
of the claim petition itself, within a time frame
not exceeding six months from the date of
registration of the claim petition.
(g) The insurance companies shall be directed to
deposit the admitted amount or the amount
determined, with the claims tribunals within 30
days of determination. The Tribunals should
ensure that the compensation amount is kept in
Fixed deposit and disbursed as per the
directions contained in General Manager,
KSRTC v. Susamma Thomas [1994 (2)
SCC 176].
(h) As the proceedings initiated in pursuance of
Section 158(6) and 166(4) of the Act, are
different in nature from an application by
the victim/s under Section 166(1) of the Act,
Section 170 will not apply. The insurers
will therefore be entitled to assist the Tribunal
(either independently or with the owners of the
vehicles) to verify the correctness in regard to the
accident, injuries, age, income and
dependents of the deceased victim and in
determining the quantum of compensation.
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 18 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
14. The aforesaid directions to the Tribunals are
without prejudice to the discretion of each
Tribunal to follow such summary procedure as
it deems fit as provided under Section
169 of the Act. MANY TRIBUNALS
INSTEAD OF HOLDING AN INQUIRY
INTO THE CLAIM BY FOLLOWING
SUITABLE SUMMARY PROCEDURE, AS
MANDATED BY SECTION 168 AND 169 OF
THE ACT,
TEND TO CONDUCT MOTOR ACCIDENT
CASES LIKE REGULAR CIVIL SUITS. THIS
SHOULD BE AVOIDED. THE TRIBUNAL
SHALL TAKE AN ACTIVE ROLE IN
DECIDING AND EXPEDITIOUS
DISPOSAL OF THE APPLICATIONS FOR
COMPENSATION and make effective use of
Section 165 of the Evidence Act, 1872, to
determine the
just compensation....”
(10) Now coming to the present case, on the basis of the claim
petition, limited number of documents placed on record, certain
glaring aspects have emerged which are as under:
That the accident in question had taken place on 13.07.2019
at 2:54 PM and the FIR was registered at Police Station
Thanesar Sadar, Kurukshetra, Haryana on the same date i.e.
13.07.2019 at 11:30 PM. The said FIR was registered on the
basis of complaint of Narender Kumar Gupta (present
petitioner) who had alleged that he along with his
wife Mithlesh Gupta, daughters Ankita & Priya, brother Harish
Kumar, Bhabhi Rekha Gupta, nephew Jagrit Gupta, Anmol
Gupta and mother Smt. Geeta Devi were going to Amritsar in a
bus bearing No. UP-17-AT-4406. It has been alleged that the
driver of the bus was driving the bus at a very high speed, rashly
and negligently and when they reached near Village Sanwala,
GT Road, District Kurukshetra, Haryana, the driver of the bus
who was intoxicated at that time, hit the bus in the divider as a
result of which the bus turned over and all the passengers
sustained injuries. According to Narender Kumar Gupta, while
the passengers were trying hard to evacuate, the bus caught fire
and his mother Smt. Geeta Devi was burnt alive and expired
at the spot itself whereas the other passengers suffered
grievous injuries in the accident. Therelevant portion of the
statement of Sh. Narender Kumar Gupta is as under:
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 19 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
“...... Jo bus no. UP17AT4406 ka chaalak
apni bus ko badi tez raftari gaflat laparvahi se
chla raha tha. Jisko maine va dusri sawariyon
ne kayi bar samjhaya lekin vah naam
pata namallom chaalak bus ko gaflat vah
laparvahi se chalata raha. Jo bus ke chaalak
ne nasha bhi kiya hua tha. Jab aaj dinank
13.07.2019 ko samay karib 2.45 ASM par rat
ko bus ka chaalak nashe ke halat me tez raftari
gaflat laparvahi me chalata hua Pratapgarh
More se aage Rakba Gaon Saanwla, GT
road, Nazdik Kongstore Resort thoda pehle
pahuncha to bus chaalak ne bus ko gaflat se
GT Road ke divider se takra diya. Jo divder
se takrane ke bad bus GT Road par hi palat
gayi va sawariyan niche utarne lagi to kuch der
baad bus me aag lag gyi. Jo bus me aag lagne
par bus ke andar aag bujhane ka koi yantr
nahin tha. Jo is accident me lagi choton ke
karan va jalne ke karan meri mata Geeta Devi
ki moka part hi maut ho gayi va merei bhabhi
ki behen Kusum ko baayen kandhhey me
fracture aaya hai....”.
The above written complaint made by Narender Kumar
Gupta, on the basis of which the present FIR was registered, has
not been placed on record.
That the present claim petition has been filed after
Two Years and Eleven Months of the accident in question.
That the certified copy of the chargesheet has not been filed.
The only documents placed on record are the
photocopy of FIR; copy of Aadhar Card; copy of Driving
License of the respondent no.1; copy of Registration
Certificate of offending vehicle; copy of Cover Note of the
Insurance Policy of the offending vehicle; copy of the
medical documents and copy of photographs of the offending
vehicle. In fact, there is no information on record whether any
charge-sheet has been filed by the Investigating Agency before
the competent court or Kurukshetra, Haryana or not. The entire
record has been withheld from this Court/ Tribunal which is
liable to be read against the petitioner.
That the first information of accident i.e. the Daily Diary/
General Diary regarding the accident has not been placed on
record and apparently concealed since this document would
reveal the first information regarding the history of accident.
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 20 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
That the various documents i.e. the statements of witnesses
recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.; Case Diaries; Seizure
memo of the bus; Mechanical Inspection Report etc. have not
been placed on record and concealed for which an adverse
inference is likely to follow.
That there is absence of material on record to confirm the
satisfactory compliance of provisions of Section 158(6) of
Motor Vehicles Act. Neither the status of the Criminal Case
instituted before the concerned court at Kurukshetra, Haryana,
Order dated 26.04.2022 Page No. 17 of 20 has been placed on
record nor the status of the proceedings in compliance of
provisions of Section 158(6) of Motor Vehicles Act (before
the competent Court/ Tribunal) has been placed before this
Tribunal [Reference is made to the judgment in the case of
Jai Prakash Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. reported in 2010 (2)
SCC 607 Para 12].
That intimation of accident to Claims Tribunal and Insurance
Company within 24 hours of the accident have been withheld
[Section 158(6) of Motor Vehicles Act].
That investigations of Road Accident by the Investigating
Agency have been withheld.
That Driver's & Owner's Form and verification have been
withheld (as per the initial report the driver was unknown).
That Site Plan (Form VIII), Mechanical Inspection Report
(Form-IX); Verification Report (Form X) and report under
Section 173 of Cr.P.C. have been withheld.
That the certified copy of the MLC/ Postmortem Report has
not been placed on record and only photocopies have been filed.
That the Mechanical Inspection Report which could confirm
the technical defect or the rashness and negligence of driver of
the bus, has been withheld.
(11) Going by the pleadings of the petitioner and the FIR, it was
the driver of the bus who hit the bus with the divider as a result
of which the bus over-turned and when the passengers were
evacuating, there was a blast in the bus. No doubt, two persons
expired in the accident in question whereas others
sustained injuries and the FIR bearing No. 206/2019 was
registered at Police Station Thanesar Sadar, Kurukshetra,
Haryana under Section 304-A/337/338 IPC yet there is no
information with regard to any Final Report/ ChargeSheet being
filed the Investigating Agency.
(12) The petitioner is stated to be a resident of E-16/622, Padam
Singh Road, Bapa Nagar, Karol Bagh, Delhi – 110005
and this Court/ Tribunal has the jurisdiction to try the
present petition.
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 21 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
However, the manner in which the present claim petition has
been filed after Two Years and Eleven Months of the accident in
question and that too without placing on record the
certified copy of the Final Report/ Charge-Sheet and other
relevant documents i.e. first DD/ GD;
Statements of witnesses recorded under Sections 161
Cr.P.C.; Mechanical Inspection Reports; Seizure Memo of the
bus etc. raises a suspicion in the mind of the Court/
Tribunal regarding the correctness of the version placed
before the Tribunal. I may note that it is the duty of the Claims
Tribunal to elicit the truth relating to genuineness of the claims
and relevant facts.
(13) I may also note that vide order dated 22.04.2022 this Court
had made specific observations to the effect that the certified
copy of the charge-sheet, statements of witnesses along with the
case diaries
had not been filed nor there was any information
regarding the compliance of Section 158 (6) of Motor
Vehicles Act. Despite the same, the necessary details have
not been furnished for which an adverse inference is
drawn.
(14) It is not open for this Court/ Tribunal to carry out a parallel
trial and give any findings on facts, on the basis of
incomplete material, since the same is likely to come in the way
of trial of the criminal case pending before the Kurukshetra
Courts, Haryana. I am now informed by the Reader attached to
the Court that as per the information available on the e-courts
portal, the criminal case is still pending before the Court of Ld.
ACJM, Kurukshetra, Haryana which is now listed on
21.11.2022. For reasons best known to the petitioner, the said
information has also been withheld by the petitioner.
(15) This being the background, the present Claim
Petition is hereby Dismissed.
(16) File be consigned to Record Room.”
ANALYSIS AND DECISION
5. Having heard learned counsels for the parties present and upon
perusal of the record, this Court unhesitatingly finds that the
impugned order is unconscionable, absolutely unfair and cannot be
sustained in law.
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 22 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
6. It is stated by each of the claimants supported by their
respective affidavits that the claim petitions were filed by way of e-
filing on 14.03.2022 upon which an e-filing number was generated,
and accordingly the petitions were accepted by the e-filing portal on
01.04.2022. The case was then marked to the concerned learned
Tribunal and it is stated that the counsel for the claimants was
regularly inquiring from the concerned Tribunal but when the matter
came for consideration before the Court on 22.04.2022, there was no
appearance on behalf of the petitioners because the Court staff had
informed them that the matter is listed for hearing on 26.04.2022, and
eventually on that day that the impugned order came to be passed.
7. This Court finds considerable merits in the submissions
advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the learned
Tribunal did not even afford an opportunity to them to place on the
judicial record the relevant certified copies of the criminal case against
the driver of the offending bus. The least learned Tribunal should have
done was to afford some reasonable time to the petitioners/claimants
to place on record the certified copies of the relevant documents.
8. It is a well known legal idiom that „ Justice hurried is justice
buried ‟ and that is what the learned Tribunal did in this matter when it
took an unconscionable step of even doubting the version of the
incident as pleaded by the claimants in the claim petition, which was a
triable issue.
9. Insofar as the issue as to whether or not any claim petition had
been filed at Kurukshetra, Haryana within the jurisdiction of which the
motor accident had occurred, it is borne out from the record that each
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 23 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57
of the claimants submitted on affidavit that they have not instituted
any petition anywhere else. Apparently, each of the claimants are
permanent resident of Delhi and there was no issue as to the territorial
jurisdiction of the learned Tribunal. Lastly the non-compliance of
Section 158(6) of MV Act on the part of the Investigating Officer
cannot be prejudice the petitioners/claimants in pursuing their claim
petitions independently as per the law.
10. In view of the foregoing discussion, the impugned order dated
26.04.2022 is hereby set aside. The matter is remanded back to the
learned Tribunal for a fresh hearing and proceedings/trial as per law.
The applicants/petitioners shall place on the record all relevant
documents on or before next date of hearing. The parties shall appear
before the learned Tribunal for further hearing on 03.06.2024.
11. A copy of this order be placed in each of the above noted civil
revision petitions. Nothing contained herein shall tantamount to an
expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
12. A copy of this order be also sent to the learned Tribunal for
necessary compliance.
DHARMESH SHARMA, J.
MAY 14, 2024
VLD
Signature Not Verified
C.R.P. 153/2022 & Connected matters Page 24 of 24
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD
KUMAR VATS
Signing Date:16.05.2024
19:02:57