K Rashik Vs National Insurance Company Ltd. And Another (Supreme Court of India)
Insurer’s Branch Office Does Not Confer Jurisdiction On MACT —Supreme Court Clarifies Where Accident Claim May Be Filed
Summary: The Supreme Court has held that a motor accident compensation claim cannot be filed at a place merely because the insurance company has an office or carries on business there. Under section 166(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, jurisdiction must be determined with reference to the place of accident, residence or business of the claimant, or residence of the defendant.
The expression “defendant” in section 166(2), for deciding territorial jurisdiction, does not include the insurer. Therefore, the existence of the insurer’s branch or head office at a particular place does not, by itself, confer territorial jurisdiction upon the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal situated there.
Facts of the case
The appellant met with a road accident on 25 October 2022 while riding a two-wheeler with his brother. A mini truck driven by the second respondent hit the two-wheeler. The accident occurred at Thatimaakulapalli Cross Road in District Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh.
The claimant received treatment at a hospital in Tirupati, and the FIR was registered at Yerravaripalem Police Station, District Tirupati. His address in the claim petition was shown as being in Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh.
Want to Read the Complete Judgment?
You have read the free case summary. Unlock the full judgment, the detailed judicial reasoning and the downloadable PDF, along with every other premium judgment on TaxGuru.
Already subscribed? Log in
One subscription covers the entire premium judgment library, not just this case.
