Supreme Court to Examine Scope of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal For Awarding Costs As A 'Court'

Supreme Court to Examine Scope of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal For Awarding Costs As A 'Court'

The Supreme Court of India (SC), On 11 February 2021, agreed to examine the question as to whether in the matter of awarding costs, the procedure and rules framed under the Constitution, CPC, and the Rules made thereunder, for 'Courts', could be resorted to by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Tribunal) that is not a Court.

The SC bench headed by Justice N V Ramana, also comprised Justices Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose, heard a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the case of ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company (Petitioners) v. M.D. Davasia @ Jose & Anr. (Respondents).

The bench appointed Chennai-based advocate N.Vijayaraghavan for proper adjudication of the legal issue involved in the SLP. Advocate Vijayaraghavan was appointed as amicus curiae to assist the Court.

The SLP was filed against the order dated 17 February 2020 passed by the High Court of Kerala (HC) upholding the compensation granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal), Kottayam in favour of the injured respondent.

The counsel on behalf of the petitioners quoted paragraph 8 of the impugned order passed by the HC that stated, "The question that arises for determination before us is whether in the matter of awarding costs, the procedure and rules framed under the Constitution, CPC and the Rules made thereunder, for Courts, could be resorted to by the Claims Tribunal which is apparently, not a Court."

The SC bench heard the counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the material placed on record in detail. The SC found no reason to interfere with the impugned order of the HC.

However, the bench noted that the counsel for the petitioner raised a legal issue where the question arose that the Tribunal does not possess any authority to award any costs as incidental to its power over the parties or the subject matter of the litigation, and the Tribunal is constituted under a special enactment is to be governed solely by the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The Top Court stated that the limited extent of examining the legal issue raised by the counsel for the petitioner, the bench was inclined to entertain the SLPs.

The Bench directed, "We make it clear that the petitioner will have to pay the compensation to the injured respondent as awarded by the Tribunal and upheld by the High Court without fail, if not already paid."