Karnataka High Court Directs Integration Of Police IT System With Road Accident Database, FSL, Insurance Depts

The Karnataka High Court reiterated that Motor Vehicles Act being a beneficial legislation, the provisions thereof have to be given beneficial meaning and effect. While dismissing an insurer's appeal against condonation of delay in filing the claim petition, a single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj also recounted the amendments made in the year 2019 and the Rules which have been framed in the year 2022, that require First Accident Report registered by an Investigating Officer at the time of the accident to be treated as a claim petition. Court suggested that all Police Officers registering a FAR relating to an accident must adhere to Section 159 of the MV Act and forward the FAR to the Claims Tribunal, so that the same can be treated as the claim petition and the process commenced. Disagreeing, the Court held, “MV Act being a beneficial enactment Section 5 of the Limitation Act being enacted to provide succor to persons who have come to Court late, but with a valid reason, Section 5 of the Limitation Act would also have to be considered beneficially and there being no bar under the MV Act for applying the principles under section 5 of the Limitation Act.” Thus Court held that Section 166 of the MV Act does not place a 'blanket embargo' in entertaining a claim petition filed after the limitation period. Court also referred to the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 2022 which required that the FAR be treated as a claim petition, and said, “In my considered opinion, subsection of Section 166 of the MV Act is virtually rendered redundant, if not redundant, it is made dependent on the various actions required to be carried out by the different authorities under the Rules of 2022.” Case Title: The Divisional Manager United India Insurance Company Ltd And Ramu @ Ramesh S/O Yallappa & Others Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.201961 OF 2023 Citation: 2023 LiveLaw 300 Date of Order: 21-07-2023 Appearance: Advocate Mohd Abdul Quayum for Appellant.