#MACT

The Gauhati High Court held that a cover note remains valid for 60 days under IRDA regulations, and the pay-and-recover principle prevents insurers from avoiding third-party liability due to a driver's licence violation unless the breach directly caused the accident. The ruling reinforces that statutory victim protection under the Motor Vehicles Act overrides policy defences unconnected to the collision.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that a superdar (subsequent purchaser without registration transfer) is liable only up to the vehicle's value or the superdari bond amount, not the full compensation award. The registered owner and driver remain jointly and severally liable for the entire amount, and courts must impose conditions safeguarding the claimants' lien on the vehicle.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that compensation for motor accident deaths must incorporate projected future earnings, loss of consortium and statutory interest, establishing a detailed methodology for 'just compensation' under the Motor Vehicles Act. This broadens award calculations, benefiting claimants and guiding tribunals and lower courts in future motor accident cases.

Andhra Pradesh High Court rules that motor accident compensation for permanent disability must include 30% future prospects and the multiplier method, rejecting lump-sum awards. The judgment sets a precedent for insurers' absolute liability in calculating loss of earning capacity for victims with 45% disability.

The Karnataka High Court has ruled that even after fracture union, residual disability and diminished quality of life entitle claimants to enhanced compensation for pain, suffering, and conveyance costs. This clarifies that medical recovery alone cannot override the enduring impact of injury on daily living, affecting thousands of MACT claimants seeking fair redress.

The Kerala High Court has ruled that Motor Accident Claims Tribunals must explicitly account for realistic future prospects and the true extent of permanent disability when calculating compensation, rejecting mechanical or minimalistic approaches. This sets a new benchmark for claimants with long-term impairments, ensuring awards reflect actual earning loss and rehabilitation needs under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

The Karnataka High Court slashed compensation from ₹7.6 lakh to ₹3.85 lakh after correcting the disability calculation, affirming that contributory negligence cannot be invoked by the defendant unless specifically pleaded. This reinforces procedural fairness in MACT cases and ensures claimants aren't blindsided by unraised defenses, directly impacting how insurers and transport corporations draft their responses.

The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that compensation awarded under the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal must be disbursed directly to the victim, not locked in fixed deposits without compelling reason. This reinforces the victim’s absolute right to immediate access to damages, aligning with natural justice and the humanitarian intent of the Motor Vehicles Act.

MP High Court rules that income assessment for unskilled labour in motor accident claims must align with the Minimum Wages Act circular, rejecting lower tribunal assumptions. The court also enhanced disability compensation to 20%, emphasizing medical evidence over arbitrary tribunal reductions, setting a precedent for fairer compensation calculations.

MP High Court rules that below-knee amputation constitutes 90% permanent disability under the Motor Vehicles Act, overturning the tribunal's 70% assessment. The court applied a multiplier of 14 and 25% future prospects, enhancing compensation from Rs. 17.23 lakh to Rs. 18.64 lakh, setting a precedent for accurate disability evaluation in MACT claims.

Gauhati High Court rules that a motor insurance policy issued after the accident date but backdated is fraudulent and void ab initio, absolving the insurer of liability. The ruling underscores that claimants must recover compensation directly from the vehicle owner, not the insurer, regardless of a prior MACT award.

MP High Court rules that an insurance company cannot be removed from a motor accident claim merely on its allegations of lapsed coverage. The tribunal must adjudicate the dispute through evidence before deleting the insurer as a party, ensuring procedural fairness in claims under the Motor Vehicles Act.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that under Section 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act, interest on compensation must accrue from the date the claim application is filed, regardless of delays in paying court fees or resolving procedural objections. This protects claimants from penalization for administrative or financial delays and reinforces the Act’s social welfare intent by ensuring timely compensation is not undermined by technicalities.

Bombay High Court rules that a promotion and salary increase post-accident negate claims for future loss of earning capacity under motor accident compensation law. The judgment underscores that tribunals must consider post-accident career progression before awarding damages for diminished earning potential.

Punjab & Haryana HC ruled that Income Tax Returns can be admitted as additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC to rectify speculative income assessments in motor accident claims, ensuring just compensation. The decision underscores that appellate courts may permit crucial evidence even if not produced earlier, if it materially impacts the case outcome.