VidhiSangh

Supreme Court of India · 15/12/2022

GOHAR MOHAMMED versus UTTAR PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION & OTHERS

[2022] 9 S.C.R. 43 · 2022 INSC 1282

AI-generated headnote. Verify against the judgment before relying on it. Paragraph numbers refer to the judgment.

Summary

A bus owner was held liable to reimburse the insurer for a Rs 31.9 lakh award. Neither the original permit nor his RTI reply was proved, and the bus was plied on a route outside the permit. The Supreme Court dismissed his appeal, those concurrent findings not being perverse. It then examined the motor accident claims regime introduced by the 2019 amendment to the Motor Vehicles Act and the 2022 Rules, which was largely not being followed. It issued all-India directions. These cover police accident reports within fixed times and special police units. They also cover reasoned settlement offers by insurers, with any later inquiry confined to enhancement, and the tagging or transfer of parallel claim petitions. Evidence is to be recorded by local commissioners at the insurer's cost where liability is disputed.

Issues

  1. Whether the owner was rightly held liable where he failed to prove a valid permit and the bus was plied on a route outside the permit.
  2. What directions are needed to implement the claims procedure under Chapters XI and XII of the Motor Vehicles Act as amended in 2019 and the Motor Vehicles (Fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022.

Provisions considered

Held

Result

Civil Appeal No. 9322 of 2022 dismissed, affirming the Allahabad High Court order dated 06.09.2018 in First Appeal from Order No. 3303 of 2018 and the MACT award fastening liability on the owner; general directions issued for implementing the amended Motor Vehicles Act and the 2022 Rules, with copies to all High Courts and to the Chief Secretaries and Administrators of the States and Union Territories.

Judgment PDF: Supreme Court of India, [2022] 9 S.C.R. 43.