Introduction

The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 establishes a specialized judicial forum called the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT). The primary objective of MACT is to adjudicate claims
arising out of motor vehicle accidents, providing a speedy and efficient mechanism for victims
and their families to seek compensation. The tribunal offers relief to individuals for injuries,
deaths, or damages caused by motor vehicle accidents

What is Claims Tribunal?

Established by Motor Vehicle Act 1988, Claims Tribunal is defined under Chapter XII in Section 165 which authorises the State Government to
constitute Claims Tribunals to adjudicate on the claims for compensation which emerge from motor vehicle accidents, ensuing death or bodily injury to
persons or damage to any property of third parties. Its objective is to provide remedy to the victims of accident by motor vehicles in appropriate time
without any procrastination. Motor Accident Claims Tribunals [MACT Courts] handle those claims which are in relation to loss of life/property or those
injury cases arising out of Motor Accidents.

These Claims need to be directly filed in the respective Tribunal. MACT Courts are administered by Judicial Officers from Delhi Higher Judicial Service.
Currently these Courts are under immediate supervision of the High Courts of various States. Under Section 165 (2) the number of members to be
assigned in Claims Tribunal is more than/equal to two, one of them is to nominated as the Chairman and under Section 165 (3), the eligibility for the
appointment of members is that the member should be a Judge of a High Court or District Judge or ought to be eligible for appointment as a Judge of a
High Court or District Judge.

Claim for Compensation under Motor Vehicle Act

Who can claim compensation?
Section 166 of MV Act 1988 illustrates who can plead for compensation in MACT in a motor accident case. A person who has himself sustained injury
or he owns the property or he is the legal representative of the deceased who died in the motor accident or he is the agent authorized by the injured
person, or by the legal representatives of the deceased, as the case maybe- can claim compensation.

When can compensation be claimed?

The limitation period i.e., the time period during which the claim for compensation can be realised is six months from the occurrence of the accident.
This time period has been fixed under the 2019 Amendment Act. It means that after the expiration of six months, application claiming damages cannot
be claimed. It is further illustrated that if the victim claims compensation according to the procedures formed under Section 164 provided under Section
149, the application for compensation filed before the Claims Tribunal shall be dropped.

Where can the application for compensation be filed?

It is at the option of the claimant to file an application for compensation. The application can be filed either at the Claims Tribunal of the area where the
accident occurred or at the Claims Tribunal of the area where the claimant resides/ carries business or at the Claims Tribunal of the area where the
defendant resides.

Relevant Case Laws

1. National Insurance Company Limited vs Pranay Sethi and Ors[1]: A Constitutional Bench of the Apex Court held that the Multiplier
concept and deduction in personal and living expenses as laid down in the Sarla Verma case. However, the future aspects in awarding
damages under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act have been newly formulated by following the standardization principle. The principles
that have been laid down are the factors to be figured, the deceased's income, age and the number of his/her dependants.
Â
2. Nagappa v. Gurudayal & Ors.[2]: The Supreme Court held that the claimant filing an application for damages under Section 166, does not
restrict the Claims Tribunal in awarding more compensation than that was claimed if the Tribunal is certain that awarding more
compensation is just and appropriate and neither peremptory, whimsical nor unwarrantable from the evidence.
Â
3. New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Sadanand Mukhi and Others[3]: The Supreme Court held that no damages will be
provided under Section 163-A or Section 166 as here the victim was the owner's son who was driving the vehicle in which the accident
happened and the victim died and hence, he was not regarded as third party becoming ineligible for compensation.

Car insurance

Powers and Procedures of Claims Tribunal

Under Section 169, the Claims Tribunal has the power to formulate and establish its own procedure. It possesses all the powers of the Civil Court in the
case of taking evidence on oath, of effectuating the attendance of witnesses and of mandating the discovery and production of documents and material
objects and for such other purposes as may be specified.

It shall be considered a Civil Court for all the objectives to be fulfilled under section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
The importance of this tribunal is that it ensures speedier adjudication of compensation suits without shaping it into elaborate and long-drawn
proceedings and hence, preventing undue delay in providing remedy.
Claims Tribunal has the liberty to nominate one or more persons who are equipped with certain special knowledge about any issue that is related with
inquiry of the compensation claims. With the 2019 Act, for successful execution of Tribunal's decision on any compensation claim, it is authorised to
execute a decree under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 which is similar to that of Civil Court.

Under Section 175, the civil courts do not have the authority to entertain any question related to compensation claims in areas where Claims Tribunal
has been constituted and is not answerable to the Civil Court for any action or decision made by the Tribunal and also it does not have the authority to
direct in any manner to the Tribunal with regard to any issues of compensation claims.

Relevant Case Laws

1. National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Lachhibai Urf Laxmibai and Others[4]: In this case, MP High Court held that a review application
is maintainable when it is sought due to a procedural defect, or unintended error effectuated by the Tribunal, to prevent misuse of its
process. The argument of the learned counsel for the non-applicant cannot be accepted that power of review is not given under the statute,
hence, it cannot review its own order. Wide powers are intrusted with the Tribunal under Section 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Thus,
review on limited grounds is permissible.
Â
2. Kailash Chandra Sharma vs E. Gurunath and Ors[5]: In this case, the MP High Court held that though under Section 169, the Claims
Tribunal has broad range of powers similar to that of Civil Court for all the objectives of Section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 but such powers ought to be carried out by the Tribunal for providing justice to the party. Hence, the court set
aside the direction issued by the Tribunal under which the claimant was mandated to pocket the expenses of the opponents including
the Insurance Company and also held that opponents shall pay their own expenses and if they succeed in proving themselves innocent
then it can be claimed from the claimant.

Authority of State Governments to form rules

Section 176 of MVA, 2019 empowers the state government to form rules or regulations with the objective of providing smooth functioning of sections
165 to 174 like determining the particulars that a form of application should contain and how the fees, if there is any, to be paid with regard to such
applications; what should be the procedures to be pursued by the Claims Tribunal while holding any investigation; ascertaining the powers of Civil
Court which may be employed by the Claims Tribunal in adjudication of compensation claim; deduction of the basis and the manner in which an appeal
contesting the award of the Tribunal and the fees for the same, etc., is to be done.

Relevant Case Laws

1. Lata vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd.[6]: The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that Section 176 (d) of the Act clearly empowers the
State Government to formulate rules relating to the form and the manner in which an appeal may be opted against an award of a Claims
Tribunal. The expressions 'form' and 'manner' are wide enough to encompass a possible stipulation about the relevancy of the provisions of
Order 41, Rules 22 and 33 of the Civil Procedure Code to appeals made under Section 173 of the Act. In accordance of this power, the
State Government did construct Rules called "Himachal Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1999".

Appeals
In Chapter XII of MVA 2019, Section 173 illustrates the provision of appeals against the award of Claims Tribunal.

In which court, the appeal contesting the award of Claims Tribunal shall be filed?

Under Section 173 (1), any person who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Claims Tribunal can file an appeal to the High Court.

What is its limitation period?

Section 173 (1) stipulates that an appeal can be filed against the award of Claims Tribunal must be done within ninety days from the date of the
decision. It is further specified that failure to file an appeal within the said time period can be excused only on the ground that the appellant was unable
to do so in time due to sufficient cause.

How much amount must be deposited before the appeal can be considered by the High Court?
The High Court must consider the appeal only if the person has deposited with it either twenty-five thousand rupees or fifty per cent. of the amount so
awarded, according to the procedure established by the High Court.

On which awards of the Claims Tribunal, an appeal contesting the same cannot be filed?
Section 173 (2), added with the 2019 Act stipulates that no appeal against the award of Claims Tribunal shall be valid if the amount of dispute in the
appeal is less than one lakh rupees.

Relevant Case Laws

1. S. Venkata Subbaiah vs Kodavali Chinnappa and Ors.[7]: In this case, the Andhra Pradesh High Court held that since the owner of the
vehicle/appellant failed to adhere to the first proviso to Section 173(1) i.e., did not submit Rs. 25000 or half of the award amount, the appeal
is not maintainable.
Â
2. Devidas v. Chandrakala and Ors.[8]: The Bombay High Court held that the court can decline to register the appeal under Section 173(1)
if the deposit is not made within the stipulated period.
Â
3. Sohan Singh v. Kushla Devi and Ors.[9]: The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that under Section 173(1) any person who is
mandated to pay any amount as decided by the Claims Tribunal, prefers an appeal, the said appeal can be considered by the High
Court only if the specific amount as required by the said proviso has been deposited and no claim of exemption to make the deposit can be
admissible on the ground that a co-respondent before the Tribunal has filed an appeal and has made the requisite deposit. But the High
 Court would not order the apportionment of the whole amount deposited by different parties under the said provision.
Â
4. Anil Saraf v. Namboodas and Ors.[10]: The Madhya Pradesh High Court while considering the first proviso to Section 173(1) of the M. V.
Act held an appeal under Section 173 of the Act would be considered when the mandatory pre-requisite i.e., the requisite amount has been
deposited by the appellant and such deposit ought to be made before the appeal is 'entertained'.

Prosecution of insurer in particular cases

Under Section 170, if during the inquiry of a compensation claim, the Claims Tribunal is assured that both the parties (i.e., the person who is claiming
and the person against whom such claim is made) have a secret agreement or have colluded for an illegal or dishonest objective, or the opposite party
has failed to challenge the claim filed against him, the Tribunal has the power to initiate proceedings against the insurer as a party to proceeding i.e.,
the insurer is going to be centrally involved in the case.

But in this scenario, the insurer has the right to challenge the claim on any or all of the grounds mentioned under Section 150 (2) in which an insurer
does not have any liability to pay any sum decided by the Tribunal unless the insurer had been given notice through the court before the starting of
proceedings in which the Tribunal had decided the award and hence, the insurer has the right to defend himself/ herself from the claims.

Relevant Case Laws

1. National Insurance Corporation Company Limited, Chandigarh v. Nicolletta Rohtagi and Ors. Reported[11]: The Supreme Court
held that where conditions precedent embodied in Section 170 is satisfied and award is averse to the interest of the insurer, the insurer has
a right to file an appeal challenging the amount of compensation or negligence or contributory negligence of the erring vehicle even if the
insurer has not filed any such appeal.
Â
2. Shankarayya And Anr. vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd.[12]: The Supreme Court concluded that when the Insurance Company is
prosecuted as a party by the Court under Section 170, it can be permitted to contest the proceedings on merits only if the conditions
antecedent mentioned in the section are found to be appropriate and for that motive, the Insurance Company has to acquire a reasoned
order in writing from the Tribunal. If this is not obeyed, the Insurance Company cannot have a broad defence on merits than what is
available to it by way of statutory defence.
Â
3. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Smt. Bini Bala Mondal & Ors.[13]: In this case, the Calcutta High Court refused to approve of the
appellant insurer's submission with respect to section 173 of the 1988 Act. The court found no inconsistency between the provisions of
section 170 and section 173 of the 1988 Act. The provisions of section 173 will have to be read in the context of section 170 and section
149(2) of the said Act. The expression "any person aggrieved" will include the insurer within the ambit as indicated in section 149(2) and
section 170 of the said Act. Any other interpretation will give rise to inconsistencies and incongruities. Following the precedent set in
Shankarayya's case[14], the court held that without obtaining leave from the Tribunal under section 170 of the 1988 Act, an appeal on the
merits of the award of the Claims Tribunal would not be maintainable at the instance of the insurer.

Determination of Compensatory Costs in particular cases

Section 172 stipulates the determination of compensatory costs in certain situations.

Under what circumstances can the Claims Tribunal award compensatory costs?
The Claims Tribunal under Section 172 (1), can direct the insurer or any party in a compensation claim to pay special costs as compensation if it is
certain that either the compensation claim is invalid as the policy of insurance was obtained through any kind of fraud or misrepresentation or that any
party or insurer has proposed a false or abrasive claim or defence during the proceedings of the case. These special costs must be compensated to
the insurer or the party against whom such claim or defence had been advanced.

What is the maximum penalty the Claims Tribunal can award as compensatory costs?
Under Section 172 (2), the Claims Tribunal while awarding the compensatory costs under sub-section (1) cannot exceed these costs beyond one-
thousand rupees.

Can the person paying the compensatory costs be exempted against any other liability for the misrepresentation or claim or defence as illustrated in
Section 172 (1)?
Under Section 172 (3), the person who is responsible to pay the compensatory costs cannot escape criminal liability for the misrepresentation or claim
or defence as illustrated in Section 172 (1).

Are the compensatory costs taken into account in any ensuing suit for damages with respect to such mis-representation, claim or defence?

Under Section 172 (4), the compensatory costs will be taken into account in any ensuing suit for damages with respect to such mis-representation,
claim or defence.

Award of interest where any claim is permitted

Is the Tribunal authorised to award interest along with the amount of compensation claim in a particular suit?
Under Section 171, the Claims Tribunal may direct the opposite party or parties to pay simple interest over and above the amount of compensation
claim at a particular rate and from a particular date which must not be before the date of forming the claim as it may prescribe in this behalf.

Relevant Case Laws:

1. Rajesh Kumar Vs. Sudhir Rana[15]: The learned Single Judge of the Himachal Pradesh High Court while interpretating Section 171 of
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, he observed that Claims Tribunal has the responsibility to consider question of payment of interest. If the
party has not unduly delayed the proceedings, then it must not be denied interest and if the Tribunal decides to do so, it should give
reasons for the same.
Â
 2. Raj Kumar and another Vs. Kashmir Singh and others[16]: The Court observed that that the grant of interest on the awarded amount
has been provided under section 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, though the word 'may' and not 'shall' is given in section 171 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, still the Tribunal while exercising its jurisdiction, may award interest on the quantum of compensation. In fact, the
Claims Tribunal gives interest from the date of filing of the petition and if the said interest is not given, the Tribunal has to give proper
justification for not doing so.
Â
3. Ayush Kumar Bilala vs. Himmat Singh[17]: In the said matter, the Tribunal had not awarded any interest and no reasons were recorded
by the Tribunal for the same. The Rajasthan High Court held that the Tribunal was not justified in disallowing the interest without any
justification and hence, permitted the interest at the rate of 9% per year from the date of registering the claim petition till payment is made.
Â
4. Sarvat Kochak V. National Insurance Co. Ltd.[18]: The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that the interest takes care of the period
between date of claim and date of payment. If the tribunal deduces that the claimant does not have the right of interest, proper justifications
need to be given, failure to which, the tribunal would fail to exercise its jurisdiction properly.
Â
5. Ramesh Chandra v. Randhir Singh[19]: The Apex Court was deliberating upon the question, 'whether interest could be awarded even
when the same has not been claimed.' While answering the question in the affirmative, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that addition of
interest to the compensation, by judicial discretion, is consecutive in the eyes of law and there is no need to specifically ask interest in the
claim petition. The Apex Court further held that, the amount of interest is independent of any pleading in that regard and in any contingent
situation it can be even orally asked.

Award of the Claims Tribunal

What are the procedures the Claims Tribunal follows after it has received the receipt for compensation claim?
Under Section 168 (1), after receiving the receipt for compensation claim under section 166, the Claims Tribunal sends notice to the insurer, then both
the parties i.e., the claimant and the insurer are given a chance to prove their stand on the claim and the Tribunal then, holds an investigation into that
claim or claims.

After holding the inquiry if the Tribunal finds any validity in the claim, it may decide an award establishing the quantum of compensation to be paid by
the insurer or owner or driver of the vehicle who was involved in the accident or by all with respect to the claim which ever seems to be just and the
person/ persons eligible for the award is also adjudicated by the Tribunal.

What are the other formalities fulfilled by the Tribunal after the award has been decided?
Under sub- section (2), the Tribunal has the responsibility to provide copies of the award to the parties concerned as soon as possible and should be
delivered within a period of fifteen days from the date of the award.

What is the maximum period in which the compensation decided by the award has to be fully paid?
Under sub- section (3), the person responsible to pay the compensation must within thirty days from the date of declaration of the award by the Claims
Tribunal, deposit the full amount awarded in such manner as the Claims Tribunal may order.

Relevant Case Laws

1. Kuldeep Singh Bawa v. Tika Ram: The court held that Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act stipulates that the learned Tribunal must
conduct an investigation into the claim petition. Section 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act illustrates that the learned Tribunal is ought to follow
such summary procedure as it perceives to be appropriate to conduct such an investigation. The investigation stipulated in Section 168 of
the Motor Vehicles Act is distinct from the civil trial. Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act casts a duty on the learned Tribunal to conduct
an inquiry appropriately. The motive of the legislature behind making this provision is that the victims of road accident are not left behind.
Â
2. General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, Trivandrum v. Susamma Thomas (Mrs.) and Ors.[20]: Justice M.N.
Venkatachaliah of Supreme Court held that the adjudicating of the amount must answer what contemporary society "would deem to be a
fair sum such as would allow the wrongdoer to hold up his head among his neighbours and say with their approval that he has done the fair
thing". The amount awarded under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act must not be parsimonious since the "law values life and limb in a
free society in generous scales?" Having said that, a misplaced sympathy, generosity and benevolence cannot be the major factor for
determining the compensation. The object of providing compensation is to place the claimant(s), to the extent possible, in almost the same
financial position, as they were in, before the accident and not to make a fortune out of misfortune that has befallen them.

Preference regarding claims for compensation in particular cases

What is the other option under which the compensation can be claimed in the scenario of fatality or bodily affliction to any person?

Under Section 167, the person who has endured affliction or has died during the accident by a motor vehicle, the person/ his legal representatives
relying upon the situation can claim damages under either Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 or Motor Vehicle Act, 2019 but not under both.

Relevant Case Laws

1. Insurance Company Limited vs. Dyamavva & Ors[21]: In this case, the claimant was compensated by his company under workman
compensation Act, 1923. After this, the claimant also raised a claim under section 166 of Motor vehicles act 1988 but the Motor Accident
Tribunal ordered a deduction of compensation amount paid by his employer from this compensation amount stating that no one can ask for
damages under both the acts (Section 167).
Â
2. Raja and another Vs. Ajay and another[22]: In this case, the court held that even if the claim under Workman Compensation was held
not permissible, the claimant is not barred to claim remuneration under section 167 of Motor Vehicle act.

Recovery of money from insurer as arrear of land revenue

How does the Claims Tribunal execute the award in case the person responsible to pay the amount (as decided in the award) fails to pay it?
Under Section 174, if the person who is responsible to pay the amount, failed to pay the whole sum, the Claims Tribunal has the power to put out a
certificate for the amount to the Collector and the Collector may proceed to retrieve the same in the same manner as an arrear of land revenue.

Relevant Case Laws

1. Hirabhai Nanubhai Desai vs State of Gujarat and Ors.[23]: In this case, the Gujarat High Court held that word 'may' in Section 174
provides an alternative or an option available to the claimants to ask for issuance of the certificate for enforcement by the Collector who in
his turn then proceeds to retrieve the same in the same manner as an arrears of land revenue.
Â
2. Premilaben Ishwarlal Raijada vs Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.[24]: In this case, the Gujarat High Court observed that the Tribunal in this
case had rightly expounded the provisions of Section 110-E of the old Act or Section 174 of the current Act. The Tribunal has also found
that the jurisdiction of the civil Court is interdicted in such cases and that when the Tribunal failed to prescribe the amount and to decide as
to what was the contributory negligence of either party to accident caused by the vehicle, the question of operation of Section 174 would
emerge. Dispensation of responsibility between the parties is merely the function of the Tribunal and the retrieval of the amount paid in
excess of its liability by one opposite party from another party is itself not an issue of regaining the redundant amount due under the award.
Â
3. Narender Singh Kadian vs Dhanpati and Ors.[25]: In this case, the Punjab High Court observed that when the State Government
constructed a rule which provides for implementation of the award by the Court itself without recourse to retrieve the same as an arrear of
land revenue, it cannot be said that the State Government acted beyond its power. The rule made by the State Government granting the
power of Civil Court under Order 21, C.P.C. on the Claims Tribunal cannot be said to be invalid. It is only an addition to Section 174 of the
Motor Vehicles Act.

Conclusion
The creation of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals through Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 was a watershed in the history of Motor Vehicle Acts which not only
provided an efficient mechanism to resolve claims of motor accident and a speedier and cheaper remedy to the victims of accident of motor vehicles
but also acknowledged that cases dealing with motor accidents are not similar to other civil suits filed ordinarily in civil courts and therefore these cases
deserve a separate forum to adjudicate them.

With 2019 Act, the powers and efficiency of Claims Tribunal have been strengthened by amending, adding and repealing certain provisions according
to the needs of present times like Section 173(2), in which the appeals contesting the award of Claims Tribunal with amount less than one lakh rupees
shall not lie, the amount 'one lakh rupees' has been substituted for 'ten thousand rupees.'

The reason is that since 1988 Act, the average amount in disputes in Claims Tribunal has significantly increased which made it imperative to recognise
this change in various stipulations of Motor Vehicle Act. Thus, Claims Tribunal has provided a platform to the victim and the victim's legal
representatives to claim remuneration for the loss incurred in motor accidents resulting in severe damage to either the person or vehicle or resulted in
the death of a person/ persons.