WWW.LIVELAW.

IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23.09.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016
and
C.M.P.No.20682 of 2016

Manager,
United India Insurance Company Limited,
Divisional Office,
No.2, Dr.Shankaran Salai,
Namakkal District – 637 001 .. Appellant

vs.

1.Shanmugam

2.Sukumar

3.The Director General of Police,

Mylapore, Chennai -4.

4.The Principal Secretary to Government,

Transport Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai – 600 009.

5.The Director of Medical and

Rural Health Services,
DMS Campus, Anna Salai,

1/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

Teynampet,
Chennai – 600 006.
(RR3 to R5 impleaded vide order of Court
dated 06.03.2020 made in C.M.A.No.2854/2016
and C.M.P.No.20682/2016) .. Respondents

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred under Section 173 of the

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award and decree dated 09.06.2016
made in M.C.O.P.No.931 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal (Additional District Judge), Namakkal.

For Appellant : Mr.D.Bhaskaran

For Respondents : R1 – Mr.C.Thangaraju

R2 – No Appearance
R3 – Mr.L.Charles Premkumar
Government Advocate
(Criminal Side)

R4 – Mr.Y.T.Aravind Gosh
Additional Government Pleader(CS)

Mr.M.B.Raghavan
(Amicus Curiae)

2/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

JUDGMENT
The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal on hand is preferred against

the judgment and decree dated 09.06.2016 made in M.C.O.P.No.931 of

2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District

Judge, Namakkal.

2. The United India Insurance Company Limited is the appellant and

the contention mainly raised to set aside the judgment and decree are that

the 1st respondent/claimant filed a false Claim Petition and played fraud on

the Court to grab an untenable compensation from the Insurance company.

There is a time delay in registering the FIR. The FIR itself was lodged with

the motive to grab an untenable compensation from the appellant/Insurance

company. The Claims Tribunal also failed to note that the second

respondent’s vehicle in question was not involved in the accident. The

claimant has not given Registration number of the vehicle in question

alleged to have been involved, while taking treatment. The claimant has

given a wrong Registration number of his vehicle, while lodging the belated

FIR. The claimant has not produced his correct vehicle to the Motor Vehicle

3/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

Inspector and in fact, M.V.Report had not placed before the Tribunal. After

investigation, the Police has found that the respondent/claimant’s FIR was

false and submitted a final report to that effect. The evidence was also

produced through RW1, RW2 and Ex.R1 & Ex.R2, to establish the false

claim and motive of the respondent/claimant to grab an untenable

compensation. Thus, the award is liable to be set aside as the claimant

obtained the award on the basis of the false claim and by committing a

fraud.

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 1st

respondent/claimant strenuously opposed the contention by stating that the

claim is genuine and not false. The respondent/claimant sustained grievous

injuries and due to loss of memory and on account of the fact that the FIR is

unable to be registered immediately, the delay occurred and the mere delay

in registering the FIR cannot be a ground to set aside the entire award. The

respondent/claimant had taken treatment due to the accident and under those

circumstances, he was not in a position to furnish the correct number of the

vehicle and subsequently, he has given the correct number and therefore, the

4/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

ground taken by the appellant/Insurance company is untenable. It is further

contended that the accident was established before the Tribunal and on

04.08.2013 at about 6.00 p.m at Mohanur Main Road, the

respondent/claimant was riding a TVS XL two wheeler and the lorry

bearing Registration No.TN-28-AK-7655 came behind the

respondent/claimant in a rash and negligent manner, dashed with the two

wheeler and the respondent/claimant sustained grievous injuries. He had

undergone surgery and spent about a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- towards medical

expenses. At the time of accident, the claimant was aged about 53 years and

was working as a Coolie and earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month.

Therefore, the Claim Petition was filed and the Tribunal also considered the

facts and passed an award, granting compensation. Thus, the appeal is liable

to be dismissed.

4. The Tribunal proceeded on the basis that the accident occurred on

04.08.2013 at about 6.00 p.m and the respondent/claimant was the rider of

TVS XL two wheeler and the lorry came behind the two wheeler in a rash

and negligent manner, dashed against the respondent/claimant, who in turn,

5/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

fell down and sustained grievous injuries. The respondent/claimant

contended that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving

of the lorry.

5. The contention of the appellant/Insurance company before the

Tribunal was that no such accident as such stated in the Claim Petition had

occurred. The respondent/claimant had driven the vehicle in a rash and

negligent manner and fell down and therefore, the very claim petition is

untenable. The date, time and the place mentioned in the Claim Petition are

false and denied by the appellant/Insurance company. The contention of the

appellant/Insurance company before the Tribunal was that it is a false

accident and therefore, the claim petition is a false one. The lorry passed on

the road was noted down by the respondent/claimant and he has given the

number of the lorry falsely.

6. The copy of the FIR was marked as Ex.P1, wherein, it is stated that

the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the

respondent/claimant. The Police Investigation was conducted and the charge

6/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

sheet was filed in the criminal case. The charge sheet filed by the Police

reveals that the facts regarding the accident is a mistaken fact and

accordingly, the Sub-Inspector of Police also deposed before the Tribunal.

One eye-witness namely Mr.Raja was supported the claim of the

respondent/claimant. The Insurance company witnesses based on the charge

sheet and the FIR and on enquiry, deposed that the facts stated in the Claim

Petition are false and no such accident occurred as per the statement given

by the respondent/claimant. The only contention raised by the claimant is

the Investigating officer, Mr.Sundararajan was not examined. However, the

Sub-Inspector in charge during the relevant point of time Mr.Vijayaraju had

given the evidence before the Tribunal based on the Investigation Report.

7. In spite of these contra evidence, the Tribunal arrived a conclusion

that the lorry driver had committed an act of negligence and accordingly, the

appellant was held liable to pay compensation.

8. The total compensation of Rs.1,07,100/-(Rupees One Lakh Seven

Thousand and Hundred only) was awarded.

7/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

9. The learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance company reiterated

that, when the very factum regarding the accident was not even established

beyond any pale of doubt, the Tribunal has committed an error in awarding

compensation. The respondent/claimant has not even given the Registration

number of the vehicle in question and if that is the position, the Tribunal

ought not to have considered the Claim Petition at all. The FIR itself was

filed belatedly and the Police Investigation reveals that the fact stated by the

respondent/claimant are false. When the FIR is not corroborating with the

facts stated by the claimant and importantly, the charge sheet reveals that

the facts are mistakenly stated in the Claim Petition, there is no reason for

the Tribunal to award compensation.

10. The entire facts and circumstances raises a doubt in the mind of

the Court. As far as the accident claims are concerned, the facts must be

unambiguous. Even in case, there is a loss of memory or the claimant due to

the injury, unable to provide the correct vehicle number, at least the Police

Investigation should reveal the accident occurring time and the place

8/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

specified as in the Claim Petition. If the charge sheet of the Police is not

corroborating with the facts stated in the Claim Petition, then the Tribunal

ought not to have considered the Claim Petition at all. In most of the cases,

the facts stated in the FIR has been taken for consideration to establish the

accident. But, in the present case, even after the investigation and filing of

the charge sheet, Police officials deposed that the facts stated in the Claim

Petition is mistaken facts. This being the Primafacie case established before

the Tribunal, the Tribunal has not appreciated the contradiction in the Claim

Petition as well as in the FIR and the Charge sheet filed by the Police. The

deposition of Mr.Raja cannot be taken as a valid evidence, in view of the

fact that he is an interested witness. However, the FIR and the Charge sheet

cannot be neglected and it is to be given due weightage. If the basic facts

regarding the accidents are not corroborating with the FIR as well as the

charge sheet filed by the Police, then there is every reason to disbelieve the

case of the respondent/claimant. This Court is of the considered opinion that

many number of false claims are filed, processed and the Tribunals are also

awarding compensation in a routine manner. Though the issues were dealt

on several occasions by the Hon'ble High Court as well as by the Hon’ble

9/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

Supreme Court, still such false claims are being noticed. Full Proof System

in the matter of accident claims are necessary in order to avoid the bogus

and fraudulent claims. This apart, unethical practices in settlement of claims

are to be eradicated in order to protect the interest of the genuine accident

victims. Undoubtedly, the accident victims are to be provided medical

treatment immediately and 'just compensation' is to be granted without any

lapse of time. The very purpose and object of the statute is to ensure speedy

remedy to the accident victims. However, such things are not happening on

account of various corrupt practices in the process of settling the

compensation. Courts are also struggling to minimize such irregularities and

illegalities. In the process of rectification, Court can make suggestions and

issue directions to improve the system, so as to minimize the level of

corruption and any other illegal activities in Motor Accident cases. This

being the factum and the case of false claims are brought to the notice of the

Courts, the Hon'ble High Court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court, on several

occasions, issued directions, so as to ensure the genuine claimants receive

compensation at the earlier point of time in accordance with law.

10/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

11. With an idea to take the procedures one step ahead, this Court has

considered various judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India as

well as the Hon’ble High Court. In order to take the System forward, so as

to minimize the false claims and illegal practices in the matter of settlement

of accident claims, the respondents 3, 4 and 5 are impleaded in the present

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and the Director General of Police filed a Status

Report. Thereafter, this Court appointed Mr.M.B.Raghavan, learned counsel

as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court in order to form an opinion. The

Amicus Curiae intimated to the Law Association and the respective learned

counsels, who all are interested and obtained their suggestions and

submitted a report, elaborating the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

of India as well as the Hon'ble High Court. This apart, this Court has given

opportunity to the interested learned counsels to offer their valuable

suggestions, so as to ensure that the accident victims get speedy disposal of

Claim Petitions and receive their compensation promptly and without any

delay.

11/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

12. Few interested lawyers namely Mr.L.Chandra Kumar,

Mr.P.Selvaraj, Mr.S.Arunkumar, Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam, Mr.F.Terry

Chella Raja appeared and assisted the Court effectively to form an opinion.

The suggestions and the points offered by all the Learned counsels are

considered by this Court for the purpose issuing appropriate directions to

the authorities as well as to the Tribunals, so as to ensure not only speedy

disposal of Claim Petitions, but also to prevent false and fraudulent claims.

The effective assistance provided by the Amicus Curiae Mr.M.B.Raghavan,

learned counsel, stands appreciated.

13. Let us now consider the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Section 158(6) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 reads as under:

“As soon as any information regarding any accident

involving death or bodily injury to any person is recorded or

report under this section is completed by a police officer, the

officer-in-charge of the police station shall forward a copy of

the same within thirty days from the date of recording of

information or, as the case may be, on completion of such

12/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

report to the Claims Tribunal having jurisdiction and a copy

thereof to the concerned insurer, and where a copy is made

available to the owner, he shall also within thirty days of

receipt of such report, forward the same to such Claims

Tribunal and Insurer.”

14. Section 166(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 reads that “the

Claims Tribunal shall treat any report of accidents forwarded to it under

Sub-Section (6) of Section 158 as an application for compensation under

this Act.”

15. Both the above provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

unambiguously reveals that the Police officer, on receipt of information

regarding any accident involving death or bodily injured to any person, has

to register the F.I.R and conduct investigation and submit a report and such

a report is to be communicated to the Claims Tribunal as well as the insurer

and the copy should be made available to the owner of the vehicle also. The

above statutory provisions is crystal clear that the duty of the Police officer

13/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

to prepare the Accident Information Report and the detailed accident report

and communicate the report to the Tribunal and Insurance company and

thereafter, the Claims Tribunal under Section 166(4) of the Act shall treat

the report of Accidents forwarded to the Tribunal as an application under

Sub-Section (6) of Section 158 for compensation under the Motor Vehicles

Act.

16. India has largest number of road accidents in the world. More than

one lakh people die in road accidents in a year and the average number of

deaths per day are more than 300, meaning thereby that more than ten

persons die every hour. Number of accidents in the cities like Chennai,

Coimbatore and Madurai are also high. Most of the victims of the road

accidents are poor people pedestrian or riding on motor cycles/ bicycles/

scooters. The drivers of the cars/trucks have least respect for the road users

and they do not even care to stop and provide medical aid to the victims of

the road accidents. The insurance companies wait for a case to be filed

before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and on receipt of summons

also, no steps are taken to settle the case and the trial goes for many number

14/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

of years. Undoubtedly, the situation creates a serious concern.

17. The reasons for delay in disposal of claim cases are many and

more specifically, delay in service of notice to the driver and owner, non-

appearance of the driver and owner despite service, non-production of the

driving licence by the driver and the owner, non-production of the insurance

policy, registration coverage, fitness certificate and permit by the owner, the

plea of the owner that he has sold the vehicle before the accident, avoidance

of liability by the insurance company on the ground that the driver and

owner are not producing the relevant documents and in the case of

uninsured vehicles, claimants are unable to enforce the award against the

owner.

18. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of General

Insurance Council vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, IV(2007) ACC 385 (SC),

held that Claims Tribunal shall treat the report forwarded to it under Section

158(6) as an application for compensation. However, the said procedures

are not strictly followed till today. In this regard, the Delhi Police filed an

15/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

undertaking to start the initiatives to implement Section 158(6) of the Motor

Vehicles Act and the said procedures are now in force as far as the Delhi is

concerned. The enforcement of Section 166(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act,

1988 is concerned, it provides that the Claims Tribunals shall treat the

Accident Information Report (AIR) under Section 158(6) as a claim

petition. The object of Section 166(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act is that poor

and helpless victims of the road accident may be ignorant of their rights,

therefore, the cognizance of the claim for compensation be taken by the

Claims Tribunal directly on the basis of the Accident Information Report of

the police without the requirement of a separate claim petition to be filed by

the claimant. However, this provision is not being enforced as the police are

not filing the Accident Information Report with the Claims Tribunal.

19. While Sections 166(1) and 163-A contemplate application by

victims for compensation on the basis of fault or without proof of fault,

statute independently contains provision for submission of Accident

Information Report under Section 158(6) (Form 51 of CMV Rules) and for

Tribunals to initiate action for compensation on the basis of AIR under

16/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

Section 166(4).

20. The judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in GI

Council vs State of AP had emphasized the importance of the said

provisions and its previous directions on strict observance of Section 158(6)

of Motor Vehicles Act by Police officers.

21. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Rajesh Tyagi’s case vide recent

order dated 07.12.2018 had finalized the Modified Motor Accidents Claims

Tribunal Agreed Procedure and for submission of Detailed Accident Report

with supporting documents by Delhi Police to the Tribunals in Delhi, in a

form wider than the statutory Accident Information Report contemplated by

Form 51 of CMV Rules. The wide ranging information to be culled out by

Police authorities was in effect intended to serve all the evidence on a

platter for quick settlement of compensation to victims. The said Procedure

had been modified vide order dated 12.12.2014 which is being implemented

at present in Delhi.

17/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

22. In Jaiprakash vs National Insurance (SLP C No.11801/2005 dt.

13.05.2016 as extracted in M.R.Krishnamoorthy vs New India (2019 SCC

Online 315), the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India had examined the

Detailed Accident Report (DAR) scheme of Delhi High Court and held that

the procedure being followed in Delhi by way of a Scheme called “Claims

Tribunal Agreed Procedure” formulated by the Delhi High Court in Rajesh

Tyagi case shall be followed nationwide, with the Police authorities to

submit the Report within 90 days.

23. The Hon’ble Apex Court had directed Registrar General of all the

High Courts across the country to ensure that the said procedure being

followed by Delhi is implemented through the Motor Accidents Claims

Tribunals in coordination with the Legal Service Authorities as well as

the Director General of Police of the States concerned.

24. In Crl.O.P.No.18110 of 2016, the Madras High Court, while

dealing with a complaint of fake accident, examined the issues of fraudulent

18/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

claims and difficulties of victims in securing compensation and issued

various directions for implementation of DAR Scheme in Tamil Nadu

pursuant to the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of

Jaiprakash.

25. Vide Circular dated 02.01.2017 the Director General of Police,

Tamil Nadu, had issued instructions for uploading online set of 12

documents relating to the accident and vehicle involved, besides separate

set of documents in regard to victims as per DAR Scheme. The Crime and

Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS) platform is to be

established as the online system of the Tamil Nadu Police for making

available documents under the DAR Scheme, in lieu of physical filing

before the Tribunal by Police.

26. Importantly, in MR Krishnamoorthy vs New India Assurance

(2019 SCC Online 315), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has directed;

(a) The implementation of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal

Agreed Procedure dated 12.12.2014 of Delhi High Court in every State.

19/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

(b) The implementation of Motor Accident Claims Annuity

Deposit (MACAD) Scheme by Tribunals on All India basis.

27. The concern of the Court is that speedy settlement of claims and

disposal of cases and avoiding fraudulent claims and unethical practices,

have been progressively formulated through various decisions of the

Hon’ble Supreme Court. The mechanism for submission of Detailed

Accident Report with details and documents as mentioned in DGP Circular

dated 02.01.2017 is in place. The Reports being uploaded online in CCTNS

website are made available to the Tribunals, Judicial Magistrates, Victims,

Insurance Companies, Transport Corporations and Legal Services

Authorities. While the online DAR System in Tamil Nadu is less detailed

than the Report under Agreed Procedure in Delhi it provides basic details

for the purpose of Sections 158(6) and 166 (4) to initiate action for pre-

litigation settlement or a regular proceeding.

28. Though the system of uploading the Detailed Accident Report,

online in CCTNS website, the respective learned counsels are raising

20/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

serious concern that the system is not functioning promptly, so as to ensure

that the Claim Petitions are registered and actions are initiated for pre-

litigation settlement or for a regular proceeding. There are various

complaints that the copies uploaded in the website are mostly not legible.

The DAR is not communicated to the Tribunal and the Insurance Company

concerned as mandated under Section 158(6) of the Motor Vehicles Act. In

the absence of clear readable documents and communication of the same to

the Tribunal as well as to the Insurance company concerned, it may not be

possible for the Insurance companies as well as the Tribunals to settle the

compensation or to proceed with the regular hearing.

29. The scrupulous implementation of the Online DAR in Tamil Nadu

at Police Station level by prompt uploading of clear authentic documents

upto the Final Report to confirm the accident, vehicular records, compliance

with statutory provisions in regard to use of vehicle, details of victims,

family members and other aspects are the basic foundation for delivery of

relief at an early date to the victims. Without these informations, in clear

terms, the mechanism cannot be pressed into service. The mechanism little

21/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

stand as it is without any effective implementation. Thus, utmost importance

to maintain efficiency and integrity in the mechanism is of paramount

importance.

30. This Court has no hesitation in complimenting the function of

uploading the DAR by Police authorities. Use of the DAR and information

by the Tribunals is equally necessary as the compensation has to reach

victims only through the Tribunals. The effective use of the DAR reports

both in pre-litigation exercise (in fresh cases) and in pending cases is of

vital importance to achieve the objective of settlement without delay.

Without action by the Tribunal, the entire platform that has been made

available would not serve the victims and the stakeholders.

31. The Modified Claims Tribunal Agreed Procedure (dated

02.12.2014 of Rajesh Tyagi’s case) directed to be implemented by Hon’ble

Supreme Court in Jaiprakash and reiterated in M.R.Krishnamoorthy has

not taken off in Tamil Nadu. No systemic change appears to have been

brought about by the online platform by establishment of any specific

22/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

procedure as contemplated in Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Agreed

Procedure as approved in Jaiprakash. On the ground, proceedings are

initiated as usual by filing of claim applications. There is no pre-litigation

exercise by making use of the online facility initiated by the concerned

authorities/ parties. As observed by this Hon’ble Court in the order dated

16.03.2020, the Insurance Companies still await filing of claims before the

Tribunal and the trial and adjudication still takes considerable length of

time. With this document, the frame work already directed in previous

proceedings, it is necessary that the same is to be taken further for effective

implementation of Sections 158(6) and 166(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

32. Presently, while DAR Online has been created, it is not used by

the Tribunals either in pre-litigation exercise or in pending cases for speedy

disposal of cases. As observed by this Hon’ble Court in the order dated

16.03.2020, Insurance Companies still await filing of claims before the

Tribunal and the trial and adjudication still takes considerable length of

time. There is no platform for any pre-litigation exercise in the Tribunals.

Section 166(4) read with 158(6) is not in use and the DAR Online, which

23/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

has been inspired and prompted by the Agreed Procedure and the order of

the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in Jaiprakash case, have been not in

use. Therefore, DAR Online should be combined with the jurisdiction under

Section 166(4) to create a platform as an opportunity for victims to secure

relief without going through a full-fledged litigation as is contemplated by

the Agreed Procedure upheld in Jaiprakash’s case and under the proposed

MAMA in M.R.Krishnamoorthy’s case by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

Without action by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the entire platform

that has been made available would not serve the victims and the

stakeholders.

33. In order to ensure effective and efficient implementation of the

Detailed Accident Report (DAR) as well as for the settlement of just

compensation, this Court is inclined to issue the following directions to the

respondents:

(1) The 3rd respondent / Director General of Police, is

directed to issue orders to all the Subordinate Police

authorities, so as to ensure that on receipt of information

24/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

regarding any accident, jurisdictional Police shall register the

FIR immediately and upload the same on the Crime and

Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS) Website

without any further delay.

(2) The 3rd respondent / Director General of Police is

directed to issue orders, conduct investigation of the accident

without any undue delay and further, all other documents

contemplated under the Detailed Accident Report (DAR) as per

DGP Circular dated 02.01.2017 are uploaded periodically

during the investigation. The investigation is to be completed

and the Final Report is directed to be uploaded within a period

of 90 days from date of accident.

(3) The documents are directed to be uploaded after

verification for authenticity with the concerned Departments /

Insurance Companies.

25/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

(4) The 3rd respondent / Director General of Police is

directed to ensure the Name, Address, Mobile number of the

Victim (in injury cases) or of Spouse/Children (in case of fatal

accidents) are uploaded in the website clearly. Aadhaar

particulars of Victim/Spouse/Children are also to be uploaded

to enable identification of the claimants and avoid multiple

claim proceedings.

(5) The 3rd respondent / Director General of Police is

directed to suitably modify/alter, so as to send E-mail

notifications to specified Email ID of the respective Motor

Accident Claims Tribunals and Insurance companies concerned

across the State of Tamil Nadu in respect of the FIR and the

other documents uploaded by the Police authorities in order to

serve the objective of Section 158(6) of the Motor Vehicles

Act.

(6) Prompt implementation of the D.G.P. Circular and

26/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

the directions of this Court is to be reviewed once in a month

by the Inspector General of Police concerned and lapses,

dereliction of duty by any authority are to be viewed seriously

and Disciplinary Proceedings are to be initiated against the

erring officials.

(7) The 3rd respondent / Director General of Police is

directed, in case, where any vehicle involved in accident does

not have insurance, the Investigating Police Officer shall not

release and shall impound the vehicle.

(8) The 5th respondent / The Director of Medical and

Rural Health Services is directed to maintain Accident

Registers in all the Government Hospitals across the State for

Road Traffic Accidents in a specific colour with continuous

running numbers and upload the accident particulars in the

Medical Department official website. The uploading of the

information is directed to be made within a period of seven (7)

27/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

days from the date of receipt of information regarding the

accident.

(9) The 5th respondent / The Director of Medical and

Rural Health Services is directed to ensure Blood Tests are

conducted in required Road Traffic Accident Cases under

Sections 185 and 204 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

(10) Necessary directions are to be issued to all the

Government Hospitals across the State of Tamil Nadu.

(11) The 5th respondent / The Director of Medical and

Rural Health Services is directed to ensure that the competent

Medical Board examine the referred accident victims and issue

'Disability Certificate' within a period of thirty (30) days from

the date of such reference.

(12) The Motor Accident Claims Tribunals across the

28/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

State of Tamil Nadu are directed to follow up the cases

uploaded by the Police authorities in Crime and Criminal

Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS) by downloading the

FIR along with the relevant documents. Thereafter, the FIR

shall be numbered under Section 166(4) of the Motor

Vehicles Act, 1988, within a period of fifteen (15) days from

the date of intimation and the CCTNS website is to be

followed up for downloading the complete set of documents

from the concerned Police authorities. The Police authorities

are already directed to complete the investigation and submit

the final report within a period of 90 days from the date of

accident.

(13) The Motor Accident Claims Tribunals across the

State of Tamil Nadu are directed to issue notice to the victims

and the concerned Insurance companies/Transport

Corporations/Owners as the case may be, within a period of

fifteen (15) days from the date of numbering the FIR and take

29/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

initiative / consider settlement of claims to the victims on the

specified date recording the Aadhaar number of the Claimant,

so as to enable verification of proceedings at the later date.

(14) If the parties had reached a settlement, then the

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal shall record the same, pass

award in terms of the settlement and direct payment of the

agreed compensation as per the prevailing procedures

followed by the Tribunal in passing awards.

(15) If no settlement is concluded on the notified date

or any further adjourned date, within a specified time by the

Tribunal on account of any specific dispute with regard to

liability, then the Pre-Litigation file may be closed by the

Tribunal.

(16) If the Victim/Claimants desire to conduct the Pre-

Litigation proceeding before any other Motor Accident

30/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

Claims Tribunal (having jurisdiction under Section 166 of the

Motor Vehicles Act) those claimants may be permitted to

inform the Tribunal about their willingness in the form of an

affidavit/letter and on receipt of the same, the Tribunal is

directed to transfer the Pre-Litigation proceedings to the

Tribunals opted by the Victim/Claimants.

(17) If there is no settlement arrived between the parties

in the Pre-Litigation proceedings, the Claimant shall have the

right to pursue a claim under Sections 166 or 163-A of the

Motor Vehicles Act.

(18) With reference to the Pre-Litigation settlement, the

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal may take a decision and

refer the proceedings to the Legal Services Authority for

dealing with the same and in case, there is a settlement, the

proceedings can be reported back to the Tribunal for passing

award or in case, no settlement, for closing the Pre-Litigation

31/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

Proceedings. In this regard, the Legal Services Authorities

have been provided access to DAR Online and thus involve in

the scheme of relief to victims.

(19) The Motor Accident Claims Tribunals are directed

to readily use the informations and documents uploaded in

the Detailed Accident Report (DAR) in all pending trials to

avoid delay in disposal of the claim cases.

(20) The Motor Accident Claims Tribunals having

special and direct access to the documents through Detailed

Accident Report (DAR), is directed to use the same, if there is

no dispute regarding the documents uploaded by the Police

authorities. Those documents shall be relied upon for the

purpose of disposal of the Claim Petition as the entire

procedure require to be summary in nature. The online

documents being authenticated with water mark, would satisfy

Section 65(B) of the Evidence Act mandate and may be marked

32/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

as Exhibits. Thus, Trial can be shortened to avoid delay and

prejudice to claimants.

(21) The Motor Accident Claims Tribunals are directed

to ensure with reference to Pay and Recover rule, that the

victims do not suffer lengthy trials and erring owners/drivers

do not escape liability, despite flouting the statutory provisions

in use of motor vehicles.

34. The above directions are issued for efficient and effective process

to settle the compensation to the Accident Victims. It is made clear that

though there are provisions in Motor Vehicles Act and Tamil Nadu Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal Rules with regard to the applications to be filed

by the victims for compensation, enquiry by Tribunal and passing of award,

those provisions would neither affect the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to act

under Section 166(4), nor can be construed as any bar against the

formulation of any mechanism for settlement of Pre-Litigation or the use of

DAR Online, in the light of the march of the law since Rajesh Tyagi’s

33/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

judgment as affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jai Prakash and

M.R.Krishnamoorthy’s cases.

35. The Respondents R3, R4 and R5 are directed to submit their

Compliance Report on or before 18.01.2021.

36. Accordingly, the judgment and decree dated 09.06.2016 passed in

M.C.O.P.No.931 of 2013 is set aside and the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016 stands allowed with directions. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

23.09.2020

Index : Yes
Internet: Yes
Speaking Order
Kak

Note: (i) The Registrar General, High Court of Madras, is directed to

communicate the copy of this judgment to all the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal across the State of Tamil Nadu for effective implementation.

(ii) The Registry, High Court of Madras, is directed to list the matter
for Reporting Compliance on 18.01.2021.

34/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

To

1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal

Additional District Judge, Namakkal.

2.The Section Officer,

V.R Section,
High Court, Madras.

3.The Registrar General,

High Court,
Madras.

35/36

http://www.judis.nic.in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

C.M.A.No.2854 of 2016

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Kak

CMA No.2854 of 2016

23.09.2020

36/36

http://www.judis.nic.in