Motor accident claims should be remanded for merits-based adjudication rather than dismissed on hypertechnical grounds.

On 19 March 2013, Arun Nayak was allegedly injured when a truck struck the motorcycle he was riding.

An FIR was registered, and the truck driver was charge-sheeted for rash and negligent driving.

The Tribunal dismissed Nayak’s compensation claim with a nil award for want of evidence.

Nayak appealed; the High Court noted that he had taken several adjournments and that the appeal was filed with a delay of 56 days.

1. Whether the Tribunal’s dismissal of the compensation claim with a nil award for want of evidence should be set aside and the claim remitted for fresh disposal.

2. Whether the delay and latches could be addressed, if compensation were awarded, by withholding interest for the relevant period.

Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for an appeal to the High Court.

The Court treated motor accident compensation law as social and beneficial legislation and noted that claims are adjudicated through a summary procedure; tribunals should therefore adopt a liberal approach while still encouraging claimants to lead evidence.

The Court further considered that delay and latches may be taken into account when determining interest on any compensation awarded.

Although the claimant had taken several adjournments and failed to adduce evidence before the Tribunal, the Court considered that dismissing his claim outright would take an unduly technical approach inconsistent with the beneficial purpose of the legislation.

It held that the interests of justice were better served by setting aside the dismissal and allowing the Tribunal to consider the claim afresh.

The Tribunal could account for delay and latches by declining to award interest for the relevant period.

The matter was remitted for fresh disposal in accordance with law, with notice to Respondent No. 1, the vehicle owner.

If compensation is awarded, the Tribunal may consider the period of delay and latches in deciding whether to award interest for that period.

The parties were directed to appear before the Tribunal on 3 November 2026 and cooperate in expeditious disposal, preferably within six months from that date, excluding the time required to serve notice on Respondent No. 1.