SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(Del) 846

High Court Of Delhi
ALL INDIA LAWYERS UNION (DELHI UNIT) - Appellant
Versus
GOVERNMENT OF THE NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI - Respondent
Civil Writ 4076 of 1997
Decided On : 10/17/1997

Advocates Appeared:
ANUPAMA CHANDNA, ASHOK AGARWAL, AVINASH AHLAVAT, MOHD.NAYIMUDDIN

The court emphasized the importance of expeditious disposal of claims under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, particularly interim claims under Section 140, to provide immediate relief to accident victims and their families.

Headnote:

MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 - SECTION 140, 141, 158(6), 166(4) - COMPENSATION FOR ACCIDENT VICTIMS - DIRECTIONS FOR EXPEDITIOUS DISPOSAL OF CLAIMS - SUBMISSION OF QUARTERLY RETURNS BY TRIBUNALS - FORWARDING OF ACCIDENT REPORTS BY POLICE TO TRIBUNALS.

Fact of the Case:

A public interest writ petition was filed alleging that the constitutional rights of the family members of accident victims and those suffering permanent disability were being violated due to the lack of proper functioning of Motor Accident Claims Tribunals (MACTs) in Delhi.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that there was a large pendency of cases before the MACTs and that the disposal of claims, including interim claims under Section 140, was taking considerable time.

Issues: 1. Whether more MACTs should be constituted to deal with the large pendency of cases? 2. Whether directions should be issued to the MACTs to expeditiously dispose of interim claims under Section 140? 3. Whether the police were complying with the requirement under Section 158(6) to forward accident reports to the MACTs?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the High Court should examine the details of pendency and take an appropriate decision on the constitution of more MACTs, considering various factors such as the number of pending cases, the number of cases decided monthly, the availability of judicial officers, and the infrastructure. 2. The court directed the Registrar of the Court to issue directions to the Presiding Officers of the MACTs to send quarterly returns on the disposal of applications under Section 140, including the month of filing, the month of decision, and reasons for any delay. 3. The court directed the Commissioner of Police to submit a report on whether accident reports were being sent to the MACTs as required under Section 158(6).

Final Decision: The court directed the High Court to examine the pendency of cases and take a decision on the constitution of more MACTs. It also directed the MACTs to submit quarterly returns on the disposal of interim claims under Section 140 and directed the Commissioner of Police to submit a report on the submission of accident reports to the MACTs.

Y. K. Sabhanval

( 1 ) DURING the pendency of the writ petition the Courts of MACT have since been encadred in judicial service. In this view these Courts would be under the direct supervisory power of the High Court under Article 235 of the Constitution of India.

( 2 ) IN this public interest writ petition the grievance is regarding the working of Motor Accident Claims Tribunals (MACT) in Delhi. According to the petitioner, the constitutional rights enshrined under Article 21 and Article 14 of the Constitution of the family members of the victims and those who suffer serious permanent disability are being violated because of lack of proper functioning of these Tribunals.

( 3 ) AS directed by this Court reports have been sent giving the details of pendency of cases before different Tribunals and details about the disposal of the cases by the Tribunals. Considering the large pendency of the cases, learned Counsel for the petitioner, relying on decision of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of lnnder Mohan v. Union of India etc. , CWP. 2646/82 decided on 8th May, 1984 wherein directions were issued for constitution of one Industrial Tribunal and two Labour Courts, submits that appropriate directions be issued to the respondents to constitute more number of the Tribunals to deal with cases of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

( 4 ) HAVING considered the matter, we are of the view that it would be appropriate if the details of pendency are examined by the High Court on Administrative Side and appropriate decision taken on the question of constitution of more Tribunals for which purpose various factors will have to be kept in view. The pendency of the number of cases; number of cases decided every month; the availability of judicial office s; the infrastructure that can be made available and numerous such matters will have to be examined while taking decision on the question of constitution of additional Tribunals. The aspect of long dates given by the Tribunals is, of course, be one of the aspects, which is intimately connected with number of the cases pending and would be taken into consideration. Undoubtedly the public is suffering immensely because of long delays particularly in these matters. We have no doubt that the High Court will decide this matter expeditiously.

( 5 ) SECTION 140 of the Motor Vehiclesact, 1988, inter alia, provides for liability to pay compensation in certain cases on the principle of no fault. The amount of compensation payable under Section 140incaseofdeathofanypersonisrs. 50,000. 00 and inrespect of permanent disablement it is Rs. 25. 000. 00. The enquiry for determining no fault liability to be conducted by the Tribunal is summary in nature. The main object behind enacting this provision is to provide immediate relief to the family members of the deceased or person who may have suffered permanent disability. That is the reason for Section 141, inter alia, providing that claim for compensation undersection 140 shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible.

( 6 ) IT has been brought to our notice that even disposal of claims under Section 140 takes considerable time.

( 7 ) HAVING regard to the laudable object in enacting Sections 140 and 141, we have no doubt that the officers must be trying their best to expeditiously dispose of such interim claims and applications though, of course, keeping in view the work load with the MACT s. We, however, feel that this Court, at a glance, should know the time taken by the Tribunals for deciding these interim claim applications. Accordingly, we direct the Registrar of this Court to issue direction to Presiding Officers of the Tribunals requiring them to send quarterly returns in respect of disposal of the applications under Section 140, giving details of the month of filing of the applications and the month of decision thereof and reasons, if any, for delay of disposal of such applications. The returns so filed shall be placed before learn




Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top