Mere Delay In FIR Registration No Ground To Reject Motor Accident Claim; But Delay Can Become Relevant Depending On Evidence : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that although the delay in lodging an FIR would not be a ground to reject a Motor Accident Compensation claim, it gains relevance in cases where other evidence does not support the claimant's allegations.

The bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah was hearing the appeal filed by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. against the Madras High Court's decision setting aside the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal ("MACT") decision to reject the respondent claimant's claim against the injuries sustained to the claimant due to skid and fall from the scooter. 

The Respondent Claimant met with an accident on Dec. 27, 2011, and lodged an FIR after a delay of 34 days i.e., on Jan. 30, 2012.  He also filed a claim case before the MACT claiming Rs. 20 Lacs compensation from the Appellant/Insurer. Based on the medical reports stating that the injuries suffered by the claimant were due to the skid and fall of the scooter not from a collision and there was a delay in filing a FIR, the MACT rejected the Respondent claimant's claim

The matter was taken in appeal where the order/award of the Tribunal has been set aside by the High Court on the ground that mere delay of FIR cannot be a ground for rejecting the claim of respondent no.1 and ordered the claim of Rupees Eleven lakh fifty thousand along with interest @ 7.5 % with a period of six weeks.

Being Aggrieved, the Appellant/Insurer approached the Supreme Court.

Before the Supreme Court, the Appellant contended that the delay in lodging an FIR would justify the rejection of the Claimant's claim because all the evidence lies against the Claimant that the accident was due to skid and fall from the scooter and not from a collision.

Per contra, the Respondent Claimant contended that a mere delay in FIR registration would not deny his claim for a motor accident claim.

Setting aside the High Court's decision, the Court observed that while a delayed FIR cannot solely disqualify a claim, it gains significance when other evidence contradicts the claim.

The Court observed that since the Claimant's claim was not corroborated by the medical evidence, therefore the delay in FIR would hold relevance and the MACT's findings cannot be interfered with by justifying the rejection of a claim on the ground of delay in FIR registration.

"In a given case a delayed FIR will not matter. Merely because the FIR has been delayed a claim cannot be rejected but in the present case considering that all the available evidences points out towards a skid and fall and not a motor accident, the delayed FIR also, require a relevance, particularly now we have been told that FIR itself has not been proceeded. Even the police in the FIR also came to the conclusion that there was no motor accident and had filed a closure report.", the court observed.

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed.

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Salil Paul, Adv. Mr. Sahil Paul, Adv. Ms. Manjeet Chawla, AOR Mr. Sandeep Dayal, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Vipin Nair, AOR Ms. M.B.Ramya, Adv. Mr. P.B.Sashaankh, Adv. Mr. Mohd Aman Alam, Adv. Mr. Aditya Narendranath, Adv. Ms. Madhavi Yadav, Adv.

Case Title: NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. VERSUS VELU & ANR.

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 998

Click here to read/download the order