Award of the Claims Tribunal
Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 deals with award of the Claims Tribunal. On receipt of an application for compensation made under section 166, the Claims Tribunal shall, after giving notice of the application to the insurer and after giving the parties (including the insurer) an opportunity of being heard, hold an inquiry into the claim or, as the case may be, each of th The Act came into force on 01 Jul 1989.
(1) On receipt of an application for compensation made under section 166, the Claims Tribunal shall, after giving notice of the application to the insurer and after giving the parties (including the insurer) an opportunity of being heard, hold an inquiry into the claim or, as the case may be, each of the claims and, subject to the provisions of 1[section 163] may make an award determining the amount of compensation which appears to it to be just and specifying the person or persons to whom compensation shall be paid and in making the award the Claims Tribunal shall specify the amount which shall be paid by the insurer or owner or driver of the vehicle involved in the accident or by all or any of them, as the case may be:
2* * * * *
(2) The Claims Tribunal shall arrange to deliver copies of the award to the parties concerned expeditiously and in any case within a period of fifteen days from the date of the award.
(3) When an award is made under this section, the person who is required to pay any amount in terms of such award shall, within thirty days of the date of announcing the award by the Claims Tribunal, deposit the entire amount awarded in such manner as the Claims Tribunal may direct.
Section 168, The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (Act 59 of 1988).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Constitution Bench on motor-accident multiplier, future prospects and conventional heads (loss of estate, consortium, funeral). Standardises Sarla Verma/Reshma Kumari future-prospect percentages.
On this section: Claims Tribunal awards under s.168 must apply the Pranay Sethi standardisation.
-
Jitendra Khimshankar Trivedi vs Kasam Daud Kumbhar
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The ratio decidendi of this judgment establishes that: (1) In motor accident compensation claims, the income of a deceased housewife/homemaker must be assessed taking into account both any self-employment income and the monetary value of her unpaid domestic services, which are essential to the family's sustenance and the economy. (2) Oral testimony of family members regarding earning capacity, when unchallenged by respondents and corroborated by knowledge of local economic conditions, provides sufficient basis for income assessment even without documentary proof. (3) Courts have an obligation under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act and Article 142 of the Constitution to award 'just and reasonable' compensation, which permits enhancement of awards even when claimants do not appeal, to ensure complete justice. (4) Compensation must include, beyond loss of dependency, conventional damages for loss of consortium and loss of love and affection, with substantial awards (Rs. 1,00,000/- each) being appropriate for surviving family members including minor children. (5) The proper approach to income assessment for housewives is to recognize and monetize their invaluable 24-hour services, as the failure to do so perpetuates women's poverty and social oppression.
On this section: Courts/tribunals must pass awards determining amount of compensation to be fair, reasonable and accepted by legal standards. This mandatory obligation permits enhancement of compensation to ensure complete justice.
-
S. Iyyapan vs United India Insurance Co. Ld.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An insurance company cannot deny or avoid its statutory liability to pay compensation to third-party accident victims merely on the ground that the driver, although holding a valid and effective driving licence to drive a light motor vehicle, did not possess a specific endorsement to drive that particular light motor vehicle when used for commercial purposes. The driver's possession of a valid light motor vehicle licence is sufficient authority to operate any type of light motor vehicle regardless of whether it is used for personal or commercial transportation. The statutory obligation of the insurer under Section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to satisfy judgments and awards in respect of third-party liability cannot be defeated on such technical distinctions between subcategories of light motor vehicles. The compulsory insurance legislation is fundamentally a social welfare measure designed to ensure that accident victims receive compensation, and all relevant provisions must be interpreted to effectuate this paramount protective purpose.
On this section: Jurisdiction and powers of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
-
Mohan Singh vs Kashi Bai
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, though specifically formulated for Section 163A claims, provides a structured formula and appropriate guidelines for multiplier selection in compensation claims under Section 166. Courts should ordinarily apply the multipliers specified in the Second Schedule based on the deceased's age at the time of accident, without deviation, unless exceptional circumstances warrant such deviation. When the loss of dependency (multiplicand) is established and not in dispute, the corresponding multiplier from the Second Schedule should be applied for compensation calculation.
On this section: Contains guidelines for determination of compensation amount in terms of Section 166.
-
K. Suresh vs New India Assurance Co. LTD
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In motor vehicle accident compensation cases, a victim who suffers serious permanent disability can be awarded compensation under separate and distinct heads for (1) loss of earning capacity (computed using multiplier method), and (2) permanent disability (as non-pecuniary damage recognizing impairment of capacity to earn and loss of normal amenities/personal comforts requiring dependence on others). These heads do not overlap and are mutually non-exclusive. The determination of 'just compensation' must be broad-based and liberal, with objective assessment of all heads of damages - both pecuniary (medical expenses, loss of earnings, treatment costs) and non-pecuniary (pain, suffering, loss of amenities, permanent disability). The percentage of medical disability need not be mechanically applied as percentage of economic loss. Medical evidence establishing need for continuous future treatment justifies substantial allocation under medical expenses. Compensation must reflect the serious nature of injury and apply principles of fair, reasonable, and equitable approach within recognized legal parameters, avoiding arbitrary determinations while maintaining moderation and uniformity.
On this section: Section 168 mandates the award of 'just compensation' in motor vehicle accident cases. The Court emphasizes that 'just compensation' is neither a bonanza nor a pittance, but must be determined through objective standards, fair and equitable principles, and reasonable approach with consideration of all circumstances of the case.
-
Premkumari vs Prahlad Dev
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An insurance company cannot escape liability to pay motor accident compensation merely on the ground that the driver possessed a fake or invalid driving license. The insurance company must establish that the insured (vehicle owner) committed a breach of policy conditions by negligently failing to verify a driver's license or being aware that the license was fake. A vehicle owner who verifies that a driver possesses a license that appears genuine on its face and is competent to drive has not breached any policy condition. Therefore, in such cases, the insurance company remains liable to innocent third parties, though it may be entitled to recover the amount from the insured if breach is substantially proved. The compulsory insurance scheme under the Motor Vehicles Act is fundamentally designed to protect accident victims, and this protective purpose cannot be defeated by technical grounds related to driver licensing.
On this section: Tribunal powers and procedures
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… The provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'MV Act') give paramount importance to the concept of 'just and fair' compensation. It is a beneficial legislation which has been framed with the object of providing relief to the victims or their families. Section 168 of the MV Act deals with the concept of 'just compensation' which ought to be determined on the foundation of fairness, reasonableness and equitability. Although such determination can never be arithmetically exact or perfect, an endeavour should be made by the court to award just and fair compensation irrespective …
-
… The provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 gives paramount importance to the concept of 'just and fair' compensation. It is a beneficial legislation which has been framed with the object of providing relief to the victims or their families. Section 168 of the MV Act deals with the concept of 'just compensation' which ought to be determined on the foundation of fairness, reasonableness and equitability. Although such determination can never be arithmetically exact or perfect, an endeavor should be made by the Court to award just and fair compensation irrespective …
Made under this section, and citing it
1 instrument names this provision in its title or its text without being made under it.
Questions about Section 168
What have the courts held on Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act?
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Claims Tribunal awards under s.168 must apply the Pranay Sethi standardisation. Another 5 judgments on this section are set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2008 to 2015.
How do I find court cases under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: MV Act 168, section 168 MV Act, section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 6 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi.
What should I read with Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 163 (Refund in certain cases of compensation paid under section 161), section 166 (Application for compensation), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 2 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. One instrument names it without being made under it, most recently draft GSR 528(E) dated 2nd August 2021 Claims Tribunal investigation (2021).
When did Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act come into force?
Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, cited as MV Act 168, came into force on 01 Jul 1989, having been enacted on 14 Oct 1988. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 2. Definitions1948 words
- 88. Validation of permits for use outside region in which granted1560 words
- 51. Special provisions regarding motor vehicle subject to hire-purchase agreement, etc1199 words
- 150. Duty of insurers to satisfy judgments and awards against persons insured in respect of third party risks1102 words
- 96. Power of State Government to make rules for the purposes of this Chapter995 words
- 72. Grant of stage carriage permits868 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.