Bombay High Court Calls For Special Appellate Tribunals To Ensure Timely Adjudication Under Motor Vehicles Act & Railways Act
This appeal for Rs.74,000/- had to wait for 15 years to come up for admission, the Court noted.
Noting the protracted litigation in appeals arising out of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) and also the Railways Claim Tribunal (RCT), which takes decades for deciding, the Bombay High Court recently ordered the Union Government to set up specialised Appellate Tribunals to deal with such appeals as this would result in reducing the burden on the HC to decide such appeals....
Noting the protracted litigation in appeals arising out of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) and also the Railways Claim Tribunal (RCT), which takes decades for deciding, the Bombay High Court recently ordered the Union Government to set up specialised Appellate Tribunals to deal with such appeals as this would result in reducing the burden on the HC to decide such appeals.
Single-judge Justice Jitendra Jain in an order passed on April 22, noted that from the response by the Central Government in Rajya Sabha, till 2025 at least 10,73,020 cases arising out of the MACT and RCT orders are pending in various High Courts across the country.
"The Union of India should consider, keeping in mind the object for which the compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is granted, whether an alternate Appellate Forum can be constituted for challenging the orders of the Tribunal. Such Appellate Tribunal will be a specialised body and would be in a position to dispose of the appeal in a much shorter span of time than what is generally taken by the High Court. This step would achieve the object for which the provisions of compensation are engrafted in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. This would also relieve the High Court from utilizing its resources on matters where the stake involved is only few lakhs and the resources if freed, can be utilized for other matters which require priority. The said Appellate Forum can also hear appeals from the Railway Claims Tribunal under the Railways Act, 1989 and should be headed by a Retired High Court Judge," Justice Jain observed.
The functioning of the Tribunal, the judge said, has been successfully tested by our Country over a period of more than 50 years while dealing with appeals under various other enactments, e.g. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), National Consumer Disputes Appellate Forum, The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT), etc.
"In my view, it is high time that the Union of India should consider setting up the Appellate Tribunal for resolving the disputes arising from the orders passed by the Court of first instance, instead of appeals to the High Court. Copy of this order is to be sent to the Ministry of Law and Justice and Finance Ministry for appropriate discussion and consideration on setting up of Appellate Tribunal to hear appeals from orders passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the Railway Claims Tribunal," the bench ordered.
Under the Motor Vehicles Act or the Railways Act, when a person sustains injuries, or dies, the compensation claimed, is not immediately given to the injured person or the family members of the deceased but they have to file their claim before the Tribunal. And because of the huge pendency, the Tribunal takes at least 5 to 7 years for disposing the original petition and even after disposing of the petition, the claimants do not see the colour of the compensation, since the orders passed by the Tribunal are subject to challenge by filing an appeal to the High Court, the HC noted.
Justice Jain further said that when the appeals are filed in the High Court, an interim application is made for withdrawing the amount which the Insurance Company deposits with the Tribunal and generally, these applications are disposed of by permitting withdrawal of 50 per cent of the amount.
"This is the first time when the claimants sees the colour of the compensation after almost 7 to 8 years of the incident, by which time, the whole purpose of granting compensation gets frustrated. The huge pendency in the High Court results in these appeals being disposed of after atleast 8 to 10 years from the date of filing. This again results into severe prejudice to the claimants," Justice Jain observed.
Most of the claims involved in these appeals filed in the High Court runs into few lakhs only and almost 97 per cent of the appeals involves amount less than Rs.10 lakhs. Similarly, 99 per cent of the appeals under the Railways Act, 1989 are preferred by victims and maximum amount of compensation is only Rs.8 lakhs, the judge noted.
Referring to the pendency of such appeals, Justice Jain noted that the Department of Financial Services under the Ministry of Finance on March 17, informed the Rajya Sabha, while responding to a question, that during the financial year 2024-25, a total of 10,73,020 claims were pending before the MACT involving whopping Rs. 96,257 crores.
"In my view, at least 30-40 per cent of these claims, if not more, would be challenged in appeal which would be close to Rs 5,00,000 involving at least Rs 40,000 crores. These figures do justify setting up of specialised Appellate Tribunal to deliver timely and speedy justice, which is the constitutional right of the claimants. Appeals from orders of the Appellate Forum should meet very high standard for interference by the Superior Court," Justice Jain opined.
With regards to Maharashtra, Justice Jain noted that around 86,000 original petitions are pending before the MACT as of April 2026 and around 18,000 appeals are pending before the Bombay High Court itself. Similarly, 12,500 appeals are pending before the Andhra Pradesh High Court, 14,500 appeals before the Telangana High Court, 34,000 appeals before the Kerala High Court, etc.
"These figures do justify taking steps to constitute specialised Appellate Tribunal for speedy disposal, if not quick disposal. Similar figures with regard to appeals under the Railways Act, 1989 reinforces justification for setting up the Appellate Forum," Justice Jain said.
The observations were made while disposing of a First Appeal in a case wherein an accident took place in October 1996 and an order was passed by the MACT directing the insurance company to pay Rs 74,422 in October 2011.
"This appeal for Rs.74,000/- had to wait for 15 years to come up for admission," Justice Jain highlighted in the order, while dismissing the insurance company's appeal.
Appearance:
Devendranath Joshi (through VC) appeared for the Petitioner.
Case Title: The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Sandeep Sunder Kolhe [First Appeal (Stamping) 53883 of 2012]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom)