New Delhi
The Supreme Court in the case of Pramod Sinha vs Suresh Singh Chauhan has observed that it is not mandatory for claimants to lodge a compensation application under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act with the MACT (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal) having jurisdiction over the area where the accident occurred.
The bench, headed by Justice Dipankar Datta, noted that claimants can approach the MACT within the local limits of where they reside, carry on business, or where the defendant resides. The owner of the offending vehicle had argued in the transfer plea that the accident had taken place at Siliguri in the district of Darjeeling, West Bengal, and thus it would be expedient for the MACT at Darjeeling to decide the claim. The court observed that the claimants had legally chosen to approach the MACT, Farrukhabad at Fatehgarh, U.P., and therefore no grievance could be raised by the petitioner. The contention was overruled as misconceived. Justice Dipankar Datta further observed that in a diverse country like India, where there are at least 22 official languages, Hindi being the national language, witnesses produced by the petitioner before the MACT, Fatehgarh, U.P. are expected to communicate in Hindi. However, if the court accepted the petitioner’s claim, the claimants, unable to communicate in Bengali, could be seriously prejudiced.
The petitioner had also contended that language could be a barrier since all his witnesses were from Siliguri.