'Shocking' Lack of Knowledge: Himachal HC Slams Judge Over 'Mechanical' MACT Order
The Himachal Pradesh High Court orders refresher training for a judicial officer after a "thoughtless" MACT award showed a total lack of legal knowledge.
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has taken a stern view of a judicial officer's "thoughtless" and "mechanical" approach to a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) case. In a scathing observation, the court noted a total non-application of mind and a surprising lack of elementary knowledge regarding the Motor Vehicles Act by the officer in question.
High Court Orders Refresher Training
Justice Sushil Kukreja, while presiding over an appeal filed by an insurance company, expressed strong displeasure with the lower tribunal's award. The High Court has now directed the concerned judicial officer to undergo a refresher course and periodic training in MACT matters at the Himachal Pradesh State Judicial Academy.
To ensure the gravity of the lapse is recorded, the Court ordered the Registrar General to place a copy of the judgment in the judicial officer's service record and forward another copy to the Director of the Judicial Academy.
A 'Shocking' Oversight
The High Court found it "quite shocking" that the judicial officer, who serves as the District and Sessions Judge and heads the district judiciary, failed to distinguish between an Act or liability-only policy and a comprehensive or package policy.
The Bench highlighted that the district judiciary serves as the backbone of the legal system and is the primary point of access to justice for citizens. Consequently, the court stated that judicial orders cannot be passed mechanically and such a tendency must be deprecated.
"It is not expected from the head of District Judiciary to pass such kind of award/order which lacks even elementary knowledge of the MV Act," the Court observed.
The Case That Triggered the Crackdown
The legal battle began following a tragic accident on December 30, 2016, when a 44-year-old painter named Trahru (alias Kesav) died after the car he was travelling in rolled down a hillside into fields at Beh-Ki-Dhar near Sundernagar in the Mandi district.
Following the tragedy, the deceased's wife and son filed a compensation claim for Rs 50 lakh, alleging that the crash was the result of rash and negligent driving.
The Tribunal's Faulty Award
On August 16, 2023, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal granted a compensation of Rs 13,93,100 with 6% annual interest, holding the respondents jointly and severally liable and ordering the insurance company to deposit the funds.
However, the insurance company challenged this in the High Court, arguing that the policy was a third-party liability policy. They contended that it did not cover the risk of death or bodily injuries to occupants of a private car, as no additional premium had been paid for passenger coverage.
Serious Errors Uncovered
Upon reviewing the records, the High Court discovered glaring mistakes in the Tribunal's decision:
- Expired Policy: Although the accident happened in December 2016, the Tribunal relied on an insurance policy that had expired in September 2016.
- Wrong Policy Type: The officer failed to notice that the policy actually in force at the time of the accident was only a third-party liability policy, which did not cover the specific risks involved in this case.
Based on these findings, the High Court exonerated the insurance company from the liability of paying the compensation, describing the lower officer's approach as "highly objectionable."