During the British regime, Indian Motor Vehicle Act of 1914 was ratified with an objective to regulate enforcement and to ensure the registration and licensing of vehicles and motorists to maintain road safety. This was replaced by 1939 Act which consolidated and amended the law relating to motor vehicles according to the development in road transport technology, pattern of passenger and freight movements and particularly the improved techniques in the motor vehicles management, this was later further substituted by MV Act, 1988. The 1988 Act was a significant law which established a new court named Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals which replaced civil courts in order to provide cheaper and speedier relief to the victims of accident of motor vehicles.

Earlier, the suit claiming compensation needed to be filed in civil court along with an ad- valorem court fee. Since, the civil courts had a backlog of cases to adjudicate, the person expecting damages was not able to receive the compensation in time and due to the court fee, the victim was further discouraged to not file for compensation. This was remedied in 1988 Act where a separate court for motor accident claims was formed and without paying any ad- valorem court fee. In this act, licensing of the motorists and registration of the vehicle mandatory.

Further, it made it mandatory to obtain a Learner's license for all the drivers wanting to get a license and it was made obligatory to use the L board and the company of an instructor while driving in a public place. It also proposed that any person under the age of 20 is not allowed to drive a vehicle in a public place and a learner's license or driving license should only be issued if he or she is qualified.

This act was further substituted by Motor Vehicle (Amendment) Act of 2019 whose aim was to ensure road safety and stricter rules. The notable features of this Act encompass damages up to two lakhs for road accident victims and hefty fines for wilful offenders. The bill also mentions a recall of those vehicles which entail undue safety risks to other motorists, the driver, and the environment. With the amendment of the bill, the Central government created the National Road Safety Board as an advisory board to manage and regulate road safety and traffic.

What is Claims Tribunal?
Established by Motor Vehicle Act 1988, Claims Tribunal is defined under Chapter XII in Section 165 which authorises the State Government to constitute Claims Tribunals to adjudicate on the claims for compensation which emerge from motor vehicle accidents, ensuing death or bodily injury to persons or damage to any property of third parties. Its objective is to provide remedy to the victims of accident by motor vehicles in appropriate time without any procrastination. Motor Accident Claims Tribunals [MACT Courts] handle those claims which are in relation to loss of life/property or those injury cases arising out of Motor Accidents.

These Claims need to be directly filed in the respective Tribunal. MACT Courts are administered by Judicial Officers from Delhi Higher Judicial Service. Currently these Courts are under immediate supervision of the High Courts of various States. Under Section 165 (2) the number of members to be assigned in Claims Tribunal is more than/equal to two, one of them is to nominated as the Chairman and under Section 165 (3), the eligibility for the appointment of members is that the member should be a Judge of a High Court or District Judge or ought to be eligible for appointment as a Judge of a High Court or District Judge.

Claim for Compensation under Motor Vehicle Act
Who can claim compensation?
Section 166 of MV Act 1988 illustrates who can plead for compensation in MACT in a motor accident case. A person who has himself sustained injury or he owns the property or he is the legal representative of the deceased who died in the motor accident or he is the agent authorized by the injured person, or by the legal representatives of the deceased, as the case maybe- can claim compensation.

When can compensation be claimed?
The limitation period i.e., the time period during which the claim for compensation can be realised is six months from the occurrence of the accident. This time period has been fixed under the 2019 Amendment Act. It means that after the expiration of six months, application claiming damages cannot be claimed. It is further illustrated that if the victim claims compensation according to the procedures formed under Section 164 provided under Section 149, the application for compensation filed before the Claims Tribunal shall be dropped.

Where can the application for compensation be filed?
It is at the option of the claimant to file an application for compensation. The application can be filed either at the Claims Tribunal of the area where the accident occurred or at the Claims Tribunal of the area where the claimant resides/ carries business or at the Claims Tribunal of the area where the defendant resides.

Relevant Case Laws

1. National Insurance Company Limited vs Pranay Sethi and Ors[1]: A Constitutional Bench of the Apex Court held that the Multiplier concept and deduction in personal and living expenses as laid down in the Sarla Verma case. However, the future aspects in awarding damages under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act have been newly formulated by following the standardization principle. The principles that have been laid down are the factors to be figured, the deceased's income, age and the number of his/her dependants.
    
2. Nagappa v. Gurudayal & Ors.[2]: The Supreme Court held that the claimant filing an application for damages under Section 166, does not restrict the Claims Tribunal in awarding more compensation than that was claimed if the Tribunal is certain that awarding more compensation is just and appropriate and neither peremptory, whimsical nor unwarrantable from the evidence.
    
3. New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Sadanand Mukhi and Others[3]: The Supreme Court held that no damages will be provided under Section 163-A or Section 166 as here the victim was the owner's son who was driving the vehicle in which the accident happened and the victim died and hence, he was not regarded as third party becoming ineligible for compensation.

Powers and Procedures of Claims Tribunal
Under Section 169, the Claims Tribunal has the power to formulate and establish its own procedure. It possesses all the powers of the Civil Court in the case of taking evidence on oath, of effectuating the attendance of witnesses and of mandating the discovery and production of documents and material objects and for such other purposes as may be specified.

It shall be considered a Civil Court for all the objectives to be fulfilled under section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The importance of this tribunal is that it ensures speedier adjudication of compensation suits without shaping it into elaborate and long-drawn proceedings and hence, preventing undue delay in providing remedy.

Claims Tribunal has the liberty to nominate one or more persons who are equipped with certain special knowledge about any issue that is related with inquiry of the compensation claims. With the 2019 Act, for successful execution of Tribunal's decision on any compensation claim, it is authorised to execute a decree under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 which is similar to that of Civil Court.

Under Section 175, the civil courts do not have the authority to entertain any question related to compensation claims in areas where Claims Tribunal has been constituted and is not answerable to the Civil Court for any action or decision made by the Tribunal and also it does not have the authority to direct in any manner to the Tribunal with regard to any issues of compensation claims.

Relevant Case Laws

1. National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Lachhibai Urf Laxmibai and Others[4]: In this case, MP High Court held that a review application is maintainable when it is sought due to a procedural defect, or unintended error effectuated by the Tribunal, to prevent misuse of its process. The argument of the learned counsel for the non-applicant cannot be accepted that power of review is not given under the statute, hence, it cannot review its own order. Wide powers are intrusted with the Tribunal under Section 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Thus, review on limited grounds is permissible.
    
2. Kailash Chandra Sharma vs E. Gurunath and Ors[5]: In this case, the MP High Court held that though under Section 169, the Claims Tribunal has broad range of powers similar to that of Civil Court for all the objectives of Section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 but such powers ought to be carried out by the Tribunal for providing justice to the party. Hence, the court set aside the direction issued by the Tribunal under which the claimant was mandated to pocket the expenses of the opponents including the Insurance Company and also held that opponents shall pay their own expenses and if they succeed in proving themselves innocent then it can be claimed from the claimant.

Authority of State Governments to form rules
Section 176 of MVA, 2019 empowers the state government to form rules or regulations with the objective of providing smooth functioning of sections 165 to 174 like determining the particulars that a form of application should contain and how the fees, if there is any, to be paid with regard to such applications; what should be the procedures to be pursued by the Claims Tribunal while holding any investigation; ascertaining the powers of Civil Court which may be employed by the Claims Tribunal in adjudication of compensation claim; deduction of the basis and the manner in which an appeal contesting the award of the Tribunal and the fees for the same, etc., is to be done.

Relevant Case Laws

1. Lata vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd.[6]: The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that Section 176 (d) of the Act clearly empowers the State Government to formulate rules relating to the form and the manner in which an appeal may be opted against an award of a Claims Tribunal. The expressions 'form' and 'manner' are wide enough to encompass a possible stipulation about the relevancy of the provisions of Order 41, Rules 22 and 33 of the Civil Procedure Code to appeals made under Section 173 of the Act. In accordance of this power, the State Government did construct Rules called "Himachal Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1999".

Appeals
In Chapter XII of MVA 2019, Section 173 illustrates the provision of appeals against the award of Claims Tribunal.

In which court, the appeal contesting the award of Claims Tribunal shall be filed?
Under Section 173 (1), any person who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Claims Tribunal can file an appeal to the High Court.

What is its limitation period?
Section 173 (1) stipulates that an appeal can be filed against the award of Claims Tribunal must be done within ninety days from the date of the decision. It is further specified that failure to file an appeal within the said time period can be excused only on the ground that the appellant was unable to do so in time due to sufficient cause.

How much amount must be deposited before the appeal can be considered by the High Court?
The High Court must consider the appeal only if the person has deposited with it either twenty-five thousand rupees or fifty per cent. of the amount so awarded, according to the procedure established by the High Court.

On which awards of the Claims Tribunal, an appeal contesting the same cannot be filed?
Section 173 (2), added with the 2019 Act stipulates that no appeal against the award of Claims Tribunal shall be valid if the amount of dispute in the appeal is less than one lakh rupees.

Relevant Case Laws

1. S. Venkata Subbaiah vs Kodavali Chinnappa and Ors.[7]: In this case, the Andhra Pradesh High Court held that since the owner of the vehicle/appellant failed to adhere to the first proviso to Section 173(1) i.e., did not submit Rs. 25000 or half of the award amount, the appeal is not maintainable.
    
2. Devidas v. Chandrakala and Ors.[8]: The Bombay High Court held that the court can decline to register the appeal under Section 173(1) if the deposit is not made within the stipulated period.
    
3. Sohan Singh v. Kushla Devi and Ors.[9]: The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that under Section 173(1) any person who is mandated to pay any amount as decided by the Claims Tribunal, prefers an appeal, the said appeal can be considered by the High Court only if the specific amount as required by the said proviso has been deposited and no claim of exemption to make the deposit can be admissible on the ground that a co-respondent before the Tribunal has filed an appeal and has made the requisite deposit. But the High Court would not order the apportionment of the whole amount deposited by different parties under the said provision.
    
4. Anil Saraf v. Namboodas and Ors.[10]: The Madhya Pradesh High Court while considering the first proviso to Section 173(1) of the M. V. Act held an appeal under Section 173 of the Act would be considered when the mandatory pre-requisite i.e., the requisite amount has been deposited by the appellant and such deposit ought to be made before the appeal is 'entertained'.

Prosecution of insurer in particular cases
Under Section 170, if during the inquiry of a compensation claim, the Claims Tribunal is assured that both the parties (i.e., the person who is claiming and the person against whom such claim is made) have a secret agreement or have colluded for an illegal or dishonest objective, or the opposite party has failed to challenge the claim filed against him, the Tribunal has the power to initiate proceedings against the insurer as a party to proceeding i.e., the insurer is going to be centrally involved in the case.

But in this scenario, the insurer has the right to challenge the claim on any or all of the grounds mentioned under Section 150 (2) in which an insurer does not have any liability to pay any sum decided by the Tribunal unless the insurer had been given notice through the court before the starting of proceedings in which the Tribunal had decided the award and hence, the insurer has the right to defend himself/ herself from the claims.

Relevant Case Laws

1. National Insurance Corporation Company Limited, Chandigarh v. Nicolletta Rohtagi and Ors. Reported[11]: The Supreme Court held that where conditions precedent embodied in Section 170 is satisfied and award is averse to the interest of the insurer, the insurer has a right to file an appeal challenging the amount of compensation or negligence or contributory negligence of the erring vehicle even if the insurer has not filed any such appeal.
    
2. Shankarayya And Anr. vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd.[12]: The Supreme Court concluded that when the Insurance Company is prosecuted as a party by the Court under Section 170, it can be permitted to contest the proceedings on merits only if the conditions antecedent mentioned in the section are found to be appropriate and for that motive, the Insurance Company has to acquire a reasoned order in writing from the Tribunal. If this is not obeyed, the Insurance Company cannot have a broad defence on merits than what is available to it by way of statutory defence.
    
3. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Smt. Bini Bala Mondal & Ors.[13]: In this case, the Calcutta High Court refused to approve of the appellant insurer's submission with respect to section 173 of the 1988 Act. The court found no inconsistency between the provisions of section 170 and section 173 of the 1988 Act. The provisions of section 173 will have to be read in the context of section 170 and section 149(2) of the said Act. The expression "any person aggrieved" will include the insurer within the ambit as indicated in section 149(2) and section 170 of the said Act. Any other interpretation will give rise to inconsistencies and incongruities. Following the precedent set in Shankarayya's case[14], the court held that without obtaining leave from the Tribunal under section 170 of the 1988 Act, an appeal on the merits of the award of the Claims Tribunal would not be maintainable at the instance of the insurer.

Determination of Compensatory Costs in particular cases
Section 172 stipulates the determination of compensatory costs in certain situations.

Under what circumstances can the Claims Tribunal award compensatory costs?
The Claims Tribunal under Section 172 (1), can direct the insurer or any party in a compensation claim to pay special costs as compensation if it is certain that either the compensation claim is invalid as the policy of insurance was obtained through any kind of fraud or misrepresentation or that any party or insurer has proposed a false or abrasive claim or defence during the proceedings of the case. These special costs must be compensated to the insurer or the party against whom such claim or defence had been advanced.

What is the maximum penalty the Claims Tribunal can award as compensatory costs?
Under Section 172 (2), the Claims Tribunal while awarding the compensatory costs under sub-section (1) cannot exceed these costs beyond one- thousand rupees.

Can the person paying the compensatory costs be exempted against any other liability for the misrepresentation or claim or defence as illustrated in Section 172 (1)?
Under Section 172 (3), the person who is responsible to pay the compensatory costs cannot escape criminal liability for the misrepresentation or claim or defence as illustrated in Section 172 (1).

Are the compensatory costs taken into account in any ensuing suit for damages with respect to such mis-representation, claim or defence?
Under Section 172 (4), the compensatory costs will be taken into account in any ensuing suit for damages with respect to such mis-representation, claim or defence.

Award of interest where any claim is permitted

Is the Tribunal authorised to award interest along with the amount of compensation claim in a particular suit?
Under Section 171, the Claims Tribunal may direct the opposite party or parties to pay simple interest over and above the amount of compensation claim at a particular rate and from a particular date which must not be before the date of forming the claim as it may prescribe in this behalf.

Relevant Case Laws:

1. Rajesh Kumar Vs. Sudhir Rana[15]: The learned Single Judge of the Himachal Pradesh High Court while interpretating Section 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, he observed that Claims Tribunal has the responsibility to consider question of payment of interest. If the party has not unduly delayed the proceedings, then it must not be denied interest and if the Tribunal decides to do so, it should give reasons for the same.
    
2. Raj Kumar and another Vs. Kashmir Singh and others[16]: The Court observed that that the grant of interest on the awarded amount has been provided under section 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, though the word 'may' and not 'shall' is given in section 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, still the Tribunal while exercising its jurisdiction, may award interest on the quantum of compensation. In fact, the Claims Tribunal gives interest from the date of filing of the petition and if the said interest is not given, the Tribunal has to give proper justification for not doing so.
    
3. Ayush Kumar Bilala vs. Himmat Singh[17]: In the said matter, the Tribunal had not awarded any interest and no reasons were recorded by the Tribunal for the same. The Rajasthan High Court held that the Tribunal was not justified in disallowing the interest without any justification and hence, permitted the interest at the rate of 9% per year from the date of registering the claim petition till payment is made.
    
4. Sarvat Kochak V. National Insurance Co. Ltd.[18]: The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that the interest takes care of the period between date of claim and date of payment. If the tribunal deduces that the claimant does not have the right of interest, proper justifications need to be given, failure to which, the tribunal would fail to exercise its jurisdiction properly.
    
5. Ramesh Chandra v. Randhir Singh[19]: The Apex Court was deliberating upon the question, 'whether interest could be awarded even when the same has not been claimed.' While answering the question in the affirmative, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that addition of interest to the compensation, by judicial discretion, is consecutive in the eyes of law and there is no need to specifically ask interest in the claim petition. The Apex Court further held that, the amount of interest is independent of any pleading in that regard and in any contingent situation it can be even orally asked.

Award of the Claims Tribunal
What are the procedures the Claims Tribunal follows after it has received the receipt for compensation claim?
Under Section 168 (1), after receiving the receipt for compensation claim under section 166, the Claims Tribunal sends notice to the insurer, then both the parties i.e., the claimant and the insurer are given a chance to prove their stand on the claim and the Tribunal then, holds an investigation into that claim or claims.

After holding the inquiry if the Tribunal finds any validity in the claim, it may decide an award establishing the quantum of compensation to be paid by the insurer or owner or driver of the vehicle who was involved in the accident or by all with respect to the claim which ever seems to be just and the person/ persons eligible for the award is also adjudicated by the Tribunal.

What are the other formalities fulfilled by the Tribunal after the award has been decided?
Under sub- section (2), the Tribunal has the responsibility to provide copies of the award to the parties concerned as soon as possible and should be delivered within a period of fifteen days from the date of the award.

What is the maximum period in which the compensation decided by the award has to be fully paid?
Under sub- section (3), the person responsible to pay the compensation must within thirty days from the date of declaration of the award by the Claims Tribunal, deposit the full amount awarded in such manner as the Claims Tribunal may order.

Relevant Case Laws

1. Kuldeep Singh Bawa v. Tika Ram: The court held that Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act stipulates that the learned Tribunal must conduct an investigation into the claim petition. Section 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act illustrates that the learned Tribunal is ought to follow such summary procedure as it perceives to be appropriate to conduct such an investigation. The investigation stipulated in Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act is distinct from the civil trial. Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act casts a duty on the learned Tribunal to conduct an inquiry appropriately. The motive of the legislature behind making this provision is that the victims of road accident are not left behind.
    
2. General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, Trivandrum v. Susamma Thomas (Mrs.) and Ors.[20]: Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah of Supreme Court held that the adjudicating of the amount must answer what contemporary society "would deem to be a fair sum such as would allow the wrongdoer to hold up his head among his neighbours and say with their approval that he has done the fair thing". The amount awarded under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act must not be parsimonious since the "law values life and limb in a free society in generous scales?" Having said that, a misplaced sympathy, generosity and benevolence cannot be the major factor for determining the compensation. The object of providing compensation is to place the claimant(s), to the extent possible, in almost the same financial position, as they were in, before the accident and not to make a fortune out of misfortune that has befallen them.

Preference regarding claims for compensation in particular cases
What is the other option under which the compensation can be claimed in the scenario of fatality or bodily affliction to any person?
Under Section 167, the person who has endured affliction or has died during the accident by a motor vehicle, the person/ his legal representatives relying upon the situation can claim damages under either Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 or Motor Vehicle Act, 2019 but not under both.

Relevant Case Laws

1. Insurance Company Limited vs. Dyamavva & Ors[21]: In this case, the claimant was compensated by his company under workman compensation Act, 1923. After this, the claimant also raised a claim under section 166 of Motor vehicles act 1988 but the Motor Accident Tribunal ordered a deduction of compensation amount paid by his employer from this compensation amount stating that no one can ask for damages under both the acts (Section 167).
    
2. Raja and another Vs. Ajay and another[22]: In this case, the court held that even if the claim under Workman Compensation was held not permissible, the claimant is not barred to claim remuneration under section 167 of Motor Vehicle act.

Recovery of money from insurer as arrear of land revenue
How does the Claims Tribunal execute the award in case the person responsible to pay the amount (as decided in the award) fails to pay it?
Under Section 174, if the person who is responsible to pay the amount, failed to pay the whole sum, the Claims Tribunal has the power to put out a certificate for the amount to the Collector and the Collector may proceed to retrieve the same in the same manner as an arrear of land revenue.

Relevant Case Laws

1. Hirabhai Nanubhai Desai vs State of Gujarat and Ors.[23]: In this case, the Gujarat High Court held that word 'may' in Section 174 provides an alternative or an option available to the claimants to ask for issuance of the certificate for enforcement by the Collector who in his turn then proceeds to retrieve the same in the same manner as an arrears of land revenue.
    
2. Premilaben Ishwarlal Raijada vs Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.[24]: In this case, the Gujarat High Court observed that the Tribunal in this case had rightly expounded the provisions of Section 110-E of the old Act or Section 174 of the current Act. The Tribunal has also found that the jurisdiction of the civil Court is interdicted in such cases and that when the Tribunal failed to prescribe the amount and to decide as to what was the contributory negligence of either party to accident caused by the vehicle, the question of operation of Section 174 would emerge. Dispensation of responsibility between the parties is merely the function of the Tribunal and the retrieval of the amount paid in excess of its liability by one opposite party from another party is itself not an issue of regaining the redundant amount due under the award.
    
3. Narender Singh Kadian vs Dhanpati and Ors.[25]: In this case, the Punjab High Court observed that when the State Government constructed a rule which provides for implementation of the award by the Court itself without recourse to retrieve the same as an arrear of land revenue, it cannot be said that the State Government acted beyond its power. The rule made by the State Government granting the power of Civil Court under Order 21, C.P.C. on the Claims Tribunal cannot be said to be invalid. It is only an addition to Section 174 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Conclusion
The creation of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals through Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 was a watershed in the history of Motor Vehicle Acts which not only provided an efficient mechanism to resolve claims of motor accident and a speedier and cheaper remedy to the victims of accident of motor vehicles but also acknowledged that cases dealing with motor accidents are not similar to other civil suits filed ordinarily in civil courts and therefore these cases deserve a separate forum to adjudicate them.

With 2019 Act, the powers and efficiency of Claims Tribunal have been strengthened by amending, adding and repealing certain provisions according to the needs of present times like Section 173(2), in which the appeals contesting the award of Claims Tribunal with amount less than one lakh rupees shall not lie, the amount 'one lakh rupees' has been substituted for 'ten thousand rupees.'

The reason is that since 1988 Act, the average amount in disputes in Claims Tribunal has significantly increased which made it imperative to recognise this change in various stipulations of Motor Vehicle Act. Thus, Claims Tribunal has provided a platform to the victim and the victim's legal representatives to claim remuneration for the loss incurred in motor accidents resulting in severe damage to either the person or vehicle or resulted in the death of a person/ persons.

References:

1. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, No. 59, Acts of Parliament, 1998 (India).
2. Aaditya Kapoor, Brief Analysis of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, Lex Peeps [Online] Available from: https://lexpeeps.in/brief-analysis-of-motor-vehicles-act-1988/ [Accessed July 10, 2021]
3. Evolution of Motor Vehicle Policies in India, Chola MS General Insurance [Online] Available from: https://www.cholainsurance.com/knowledge-center/car-insurance/evolution-of-motor-vehicle-policies-in-india [Accessed July 10, 2021]
4. Mohd Aqib Aslam, The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Analysis, Legal Service India [Online] Available from: http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-2663-the-motor-vehicles-act-1988-an-analysis.html [Accessed July 11, 2021]
5. LawTeacher. November 2013. Provisions of Motor Vehicles Act. [online]. Available from: https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/commercial-law/provisions-of-motor-vehicles-act-commercial-law-essay.php?vref=1 [Accessed 20 July 2021].
6. Spiti Sarkar, Legal Pronouncements for Compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, Legal Service India [Online] Available from: http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-95-legal-pronouncements-for-compensation-under-section-166-of-the-motor-vehicles-act-1988.html [Accessed 15 July 2021]
7. Diganth Raj Sehgal, Road Accident Claim Compensation, Ipleaders, July 31, 2019 [Online] Available from: https://blog.ipleaders.in/road-accident-claim-compensation/#Section_166_of_the_Motor_Vehicles_Act_1988 [Accessed July 12 2021]

End-Notes:

1. National Insurance Company Limited vs Pranay Sethi and Ors, 2017 (4) KLT 662 (SC)
2. Nagappa v. Gurudayal & Ors., (2003) 2 SCC 274
3. New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Sadanand Mukhi and Others, (2009) 2 SCC 417
4. National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Lachhibai Urf Laxmibai and Others, AIR 1997 MP 172
5. Kailash Chandra Sharma vs E. Gurunath and Ors., AIR 2007 MP 161
6. Lata vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd., 2005 ACJ 857
7. S. Venkata Subbaiah vs Kodavali Chinnappa and Ors., 2003 ACJ 308
8. Devidas v. Chandrakala and Ors., 1996(1) ACJ 566
9. Sohan Singh v. Kushla Devi and Ors., 1988(1) ACJ 472
10. Anil Saraf v. Namboodas and Ors., 1997 ACJ 1411
11. National Insurance Corporation Company Limited, Chandigarh v. Nicolletta Rohtagi and Ors. Reported, (2002) 7 SCC 456
12. Shankarayya And Anr. vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd., 1998 ACJ 513
13. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Smt. Bini Bala Mondal & Ors., 2001 ACJ 1959
14. Supra note 12
15. Rajesh Kumar Vs. Sudhir Rana, 2009 ACJ 735
16. Raj Kumar and another Vs. Kashmir Singh and others, 2009 ACJ 745
17. Ayush Kumar Bilala vs. Himmat Singh, 2007 ACJ 462
18. Sarvat Kochak V. National Insurance Co. Ltd., 2006 ACJ 2101
19. Ramesh Chandra v. Randhir Singh, 1990 ACJ 777 (SC)
20. General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, Trivandrum v. Susamma Thomas (Mrs.) and Ors., 1994 AIR 1631
21. Insurance Company Limited vs. Dyamavva & Ors, 2013(2) ALL MR 399 (S.C.)
22. Raja and another Vs. Ajay and another, 2007 (2) ACCD 1008 (MP)
23. Hirabhai Nanubhai Desai vs State of Gujarat and Ors., (1990) 2 GLR 1265
24. Premilaben Ishwarlal Raijada vs Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., 1998 ACJ 1339
25. Narender Singh Kadian vs Dhanpati and Ors., 2000 ACJ 51