ANIL KUMAR Vs. SMT. KEWLA DEVI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) This appeal filed under Sec. 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, questions the validity of the judgement passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in MACP No. 58/2002 allowing a compensation of Rs. 1,70,000.00 against the appellant.

(3.) On the very opening of the arguments by learned counsel for the appellant, the question that crops up is as to who are the necessary parties in a claim petition filed under Sec. 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The claim petitions under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 are instituted in relation to an accident where the ownership of offending vehicle is traceable to some person upon whom the liability arising out of an accident is fixed after adjudication. As per the provisions of Sec. 168 of the Act the liability can be fixed against the owner of the offending vehicle, insurance company or the driver. In a situation where the ownership of offending vehicle is untraceable, the claim is instituted under Sec. 161 of Motor Vehicles Act which is classified as a ''hit and run' case. The forum for adjudication of a claim under Sec. 166 is the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal whereas hit and run cases are adjudicated under the Solatium Scheme, 1989 promulgated by the Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred under sub-section (1) of Sec. 163 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (Act No. 59 of 1988).