Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 206
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Dharmesh Sharma, J
DELHI STATE LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY DSLSA ) – Appellant
Versus
SMT. DURGAWANTI & ORS. – Respondent
CM(M)-500/2021
Ms. Deepali Gupta, Adv., Mr. Manish Maini, Amicus Curiae, Mr. T. Kanniappan, Adv. for R-1 to R-4
The Delhi Victim Compensation Scheme does not apply to motor accident victims, and compensation must be awarded under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Headnote:
(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 146 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 357A - Compensation in hit-and-run cases - The Tribunal awarded compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased, with 90% liability on the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLSA) - The Court held that the DVC Scheme does not apply to motor accident victims, as per Clause 10(5) - The Tribunal's direction for DSLSA to pay was flawed, as it failed to follow the statutory provisions - The impugned award was quashed, allowing claimants to seek compensation from the vehicle owner. (Paras 25, 26)
(B) Legal Framework - The Court emphasized that compensation for motor vehicle accidents must be determined under the Motor Vehicles Act, and not through the DVC Scheme, which is specifically excluded for such cases. (Paras 19, 21)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. hit and run accident (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. tribunal's findings (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. grounds for challenge (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. legal framework for compensation (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This Judgment shall decide the present Civil Miscellaneous (Main) Petition filed by the petitioner/DSLSA, [Delhi State Legal Services Authority], invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, thereby assailing the impugned judgment/award dated 25.01.2021, passed by the learned Additional District Judge-01/Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (North West), Rohini Courts, Delhi [“learned Tribunal”], in MACT Case No. 217/19/17, titled Durgawanti & Ors. vs. Sh. Bhupinder Singh, whereby, in an apparently hit and run motor accident resulting in death, the claimants, being the widow, two daughters and one son of the deceased, were awarded compensation, 90% of which is fastened upon the DSLSA.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the respondents, being the legal heirs of the deceased, filed a claim for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, before the learned Tribunal in relation to a hit and run accident that occurred on 08.10.2016 at approximately 5:30 a.m. The accident involved the rash driving of a motorcycle bearing registration number DL-8SBE-2863, which struck the victim, Ram Dhani, inflicting fatal injuries, to which he succumbed the following day.
3. The incident led to registration of FIR No 959/16 under Sections 279/304-A IPC, [Indian Penal Code, 1860] at Police Station Mangolpuri, Delhi. In the claim petition filed by the legal heirs of the deceased, respondent No.5, Shri Bhupinder Singh, claimed that the motorcycle had been stolen from his residence on the intervening night of 3rd-4th October 2016 and that an FIR, [First Information Report] regarding the theft was lodged on 08.10.2016. He contended that he was unaware of the accident, as the vehicle was not in his possession at the time.
4. Suffice to state that the learned Tribunal, vide the impugned judgment dated 25.01.2021, found that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the motorcycle, resulting in the death of Ram Dhani. It further noted that the vehicle was uninsured at the time of the accident and that the owner, Shri Bhupinder Singh, failed to maintain valid insurance for a significant period.
5. The learned Tribunal acknowledged that the offending vehicle had been stolen and that the owner had reported the theft. However, it also noted that the statutory insurance requirement under Section 146 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, had not been met. The learned Tribunal emphasized that compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is a beneficial provision, and in cases of hit-and-run accidents, the State may bear the liability to compensate the victims' families, especially when the owner of the vehicle was negligent in not maintaining valid insurance.
6. In light of the above, the learned Tribunal awarded payment of compensation to the tune of Rs. 7,67,600/- with interest @ 9 % per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition to the legal heirs of the deceased/respondents No. 1 to 4. At the same time further directed that 10% of the awarded compensation amount be paid by the respondent No. 5 owner, Sh. Bhupinder Singh, while the remaining 90% be paid by the DSLSA under the Delhi Victim Compensation Scheme, 2018 [“DVC Scheme”].
7. Aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court seeking the following reliefs:
“a) Set aside the impugned Award/ Judgment dated 25-01-2021 in MACT Case no.217/19/ passed by Mr. Mukesh Kumar Gupta, ADJ -1 & Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (NW) Rohini Courts, Delhi, to the extent the said judgment directs the payment of compensation to be made by the petitioner DSLSA to the legal heirs of deceased from the fund of Delhi Victim Compensation Scheme, 2018.
b) Hold/direct that the petitioner DSLSA is not liable to pay any amount to the legal
