Hit & Run Cases: Kerala High Court Explains Procedure To Claim Compensation Under 1989 Solatium Scheme

The Kerala High Court recently embarked upon a detailed analysis of the Solatium Scheme of 1989 framed by the Central Government under Section 163(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 which provides for compensation in hit and run accidents.

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan was of the opinion that the general public is not aware of the Scheme or the competent authority to be approached in order to submit an application for getting compensation in 'hit and run' cases. 

"A reading of Sections 161 to 163 of the Act, 1988 and the Solatium Scheme, 1989, will show that it is a complete code and a time limit is also prescribed for paying the compensation in 'hit and run' motor accident cases. The victims of hit and run motor accident cases should invoke the above provisions and the statutory compensation available to them should be utilised," the bench said while explaining the Scheme in detail. 

The Case:

The petitioner in the instant case was a victim of a 'hit and run' accident. He had submitted a complaint before the Kalamassery Police station, which, after investigation, informed the petitioner that they had been unable to identify the vehicle, and a notice was issued stating the case to be undetectable. 

Thereafter, the petitioner approached the authorities concerned for getting compensation under the Solatium Scheme, 1989. However, there was no response to the same. It is in this context that the instant writ petition was filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the State of Kerala to appoint Claim Enquiry Officers in every Taluk for the purpose of settling claims under Section 161 of the MV Act. The Petitioner also sought compensation in a time bound manner. 

Advocates P. Sanjay, A. Parvathi Menon, Biju Meenattoor, Paul Varghese (Pallath), P.A. Mohammed Aslam, Kiran Narayanan, Prasoon Sunny, Rahul Raj P., and Amrutha M. Nair, for the petitioner averred that the respondents were neither taking steps for disbursing the compensation amount nor were they appointing any claims enquiry officer as per the Scheme. 

On the other hand, the respondents represented by the Government Pleader Jimmy George, submitted that the law governing the issue was the Solatium Scheme, 1989 and that it designates Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) as the Claims Enquiry Officer and the District Collector as the Claims Settlement Officer. The Government Pleader further submitted that the petitioner had not submitted an application seeking compensation as laid down in Form I under the Scheme, and that the District Collector had directed the Sub-Collector, Fort Kochi to examine the issue and to submit a report in the prescribed format along with application in Form 1. Since the report from the RDO was still awaited, the GP submitted before the Court that necessary orders would be passed once the said report had been received. 

Findings of the Court:

The Court observed that Section 161 of the Act, 1988 deals with special provisions as to the compensation in case of hit and run motor accident. In particular, it found that as per Section 161 (3), in respect of the death of any person resulting from a hit and run motor accident, a fixed sum of Rs. 25,000/- would be paid as compensation, and in case of grievous hurt to any person resulting from a hit and run motor accident, a fixed sum of Rs. 12,500/- would be granted. 

Section 163 also specifies that the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make a scheme specifying, the manner in which the scheme shall be administered by the General Insurance Corporation, the form, manner and the time within which applications for compensation may be made, the officers or authorities to whom such applications may be made, the procedure to be followed by such officers or authorities for considering and passing orders on such applications and all other matters connected with, or incidental to, the administration of the scheme and the payment of compensation. It is on the basis of this provision that the Solatium Scheme, 1989 was framed by the Central Government.

The Court further found that Clause 20 of the Scheme stipulates the procedure for making the claim application. The procedure to be followed by the Claims Enquiry Officer is also enshrined in Clause 21 of the Solatium Scheme, and the sanctioning of the claims is provided for in Clause 22. 

Thus, the Court deduced that, 

From a combined reading of Clauses 20, 21 and 22, it is clear that the victim of a 'hit and run' motor accident case can submit an application seeking compensation in Form I of Solatium Scheme 1989 along with duly filled discharge receipt in Form II and the undertaking in Form V to the Claims Enquiry Officer, namely the Revenue Divisional Officer of the jurisdiction, where the accident takes place.

On receipt of the claims application, the Claims Enquiry Officer shall obtain a copy of the FIR, inquest report, postmortem report or certificate of injury as the case may be, from the concerned authorities and hold enquiry in respect of claims arising out of hit and run motor accidents.

It is the duty of the Claims Enquiry Officer to submit its report in Form III along with discharge receipt in Form II and the undertaking in Form V along with his own recommendations.

On receipt of the report from the Claims Enquiry Officer, the Claims Settlement Commissioner shall sanction the claim as soon as possible, within a period not exceeding fifteen days from the date of receipt of such report and communicate the sanctioning order in Form IV along with duly filled in discharge receipt in Form II and the undertaking in Form V to the Nominated Officer of the Insurance Company with a copy to all authorities concerned mentioned in Clause 22.

The Court further found in the instant case that Revenue Divisional Officer of the jurisdiction where the accident happened, is the Claims Enquiry Officer and the District Collector of that jurisdiction is the Claims Settlement Commissioner. The Court also took note of the submission made by the the Government Pleader that even though the petitioner had not submitted the application in Form I, the District Collector had taken necessary steps and directed the RDO to get the application in the correct form. 

In light of these circumstances, the Court directed that the petitioner herein would be free to submit a proper application as per Form I of the Solatium Scheme, 1989 along with duly filled discharge receipt in Form II and undertaking in Form V to the Claims Enquiry Officer within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

It was further directed that once such an application was received, the Claims Enquiry Officer would have to conduct necessary enquiry in accordance to Clause 21 of the Scheme and submit the report to the Claims Settlement Commissioner, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of Form I application from the petitioner, and added that the latter ought to consider the report and pass orders , within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the report. 

Case Title: V.K. Bhasi v. State of Kerala & Anr. 

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 568 

Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment