The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to entertain applications for compensation in hit and run motor accident cases, as specific procedures and forums are provided under sections 161 and 163 of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Solatium Scheme, 1989.

( 1 ) BY this writ petition, filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of India, the petitioner prays for quashing of the order dated 5. 8. 1999 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal in Claim Case No. 2 of 1999 whereby, the objection taken by the petitioner as regards to the maintainability of the application has been overruled.

( 2 ) SHORT facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that respondent Nos. 1 to 4 filed application before the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal under sections 161 and 163 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation of Rs. 25,000 on account of death of their father in a hit and run motor accident. Petitioner appeared and took objection to the jurisdiction of the motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') to grant compensation in case of hit and run motor accident. The Tribunal by the impugned order held that it has jurisdiction to entertain the application and overruled the objection.

( 3 ) MR. N. S. Ruprah appears on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. Atulanand Awasthy appears for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 whereas, respondent No. 5 is represented by Mr. Vivekanand Awasthy, G. A. Mr. Ruprah, appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that under section 163 of the Motor vehicles Act, 1988, the Central Government has framed scheme which is known as Solatium Scheme, 1989, and according to that, application for grant of compensation in case of hit and run motor accidents has to be filed before the Claims Enquiry officer of the Subdivision. This being so, according to Mr. Ruprah, application for grant of compensation in case of hit and run motor accident cannot be entertained by the Tribunal. Mr. Atulanand Awasthy, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4, however, submits that an application for grant of compensation in case of hit and run motor accident is maintainable before the Tribunal.

( 4 ) IN order to appreciate the rival submissions it would be apt to consider the relevant provisions of the Act one by one. Section 161 of the Act which is relevant for the purpose reads as follows: "161. Special provisions as to compensation in case of hit and run motor accident. (1) For the purposes of this section, section 162 and section 163 (a) 'grievous hurt' shall have the same meaning as in the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860); (b) 'hit and run motor accident' means an accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle or motor vehicles the identity whereof cannot be ascertained in spite of reasonable efforts for the purpose; (c) 'scheme' means the scheme framed under section 163. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in the General Insurance Business (Nationalisation) Act, 1972 (57 of 1972)or any other law for the time being in force or any instrument having the force of law, the General Insurance Corporation of India formed under section 9 of the said Act and the insurance companies for the time being carrying on general insurance business in India shall provide for paying in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the scheme, compensation in respect of the death of, or grievous hurt to, persons resulting from hit and run motor accidents. (3) Subject to the provisions of this Act and the scheme, there shall be paid as compensation (a) in respect of the death of any person resulting from a hit and run motor accident, a fixed sum of twenty-five thousand rupees; (b) in respect of grievous hurt to any person resulting from a hit and run motor accident, a fixed sum of twelve thousand and five hundred rupees; (4) The provisions of sub-section (1) of section 166 shall apply for the purpose of making applications for compensation under this section as they apply for the purpose of making applications for compensation referred to in that subsection. " a plain reading of this section makes it clear that it has contemplated special provisions for grant of compensation in cases of death or grievous hurt in hit an