Motor accident claims cannot be rejected solely on the ground of delay in lodging the FIR.

The litigation arises from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on July 10, 2015

The First Information Report (FIR) was lodged on August 29, 2015, marking a delay of 50 days, followed by a charge sheet filed on December 29, 2015

The claimant, who suffered permanent disability, sought compensation before the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (F.T.C.) Dhamtari

The Tribunal, vide award dated February 10, 2020, granted a sum of Rs. 8,24,932

The Insurance Company appealed (MAC No. 1052/2020) alleging false implication due to the delay in FIR and vehicle seizure

Simultaneously, the claimant appealed (MAC No. 798/2020) for enhancement of compensation

1. Whether the delay of 50 days in lodging the FIR is sufficient grounds to reject the claim petition

2. Whether the claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation under the heads of "loss of amenities" and "future medical treatment" due to permanent disability

The Court primarily relied on the precedent set by the Supreme Court in Ravi v. Badrinarayan & Others (2011) 4 SCC 693, which establishes that a motor accident claim cannot be rejected solely on the basis of a delay in lodging the FIR.

The Court further applied the principles of "just compensation" under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, specifically recognizing that victims with permanent disability are entitled to non-pecuniary damages such as loss of amenities and provisions for future medical expenses.

In addressing the Insurance Company’s appeal, the Court held that procedural delays in FIR registration or vehicle seizure do not automatically suggest fraudulent implication; per the Ravi precedent, such delays are not fatal to a claim case.

Consequently, the insurer's challenge to the liability was dismissed.

the Court observed that the Tribunal failed to award compensation for loss of amenities and future medical treatment despite the evidence of permanent disability.

The Court determined that the claimant was entitled to additional compensation to cover these specific heads, evaluating the requirements at Rs. 50,000 for loss of amenities and Rs. 50,000 for future medical treatment.

The Court enhanced the total compensation from Rs. 8,24,932 to Rs. 9,24,932.

The respondent (Insurance Company) was directed to deposit the additional Rs. 1,00,000 within 45 days, carrying interest at 6% per annum from the date of the claim application's filing until its realization.

All other conditions of the original award remained intact.