Prayagraj: The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, has called upon the Presiding Officer of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Sultanpur, to furnish an explanation as to under what circumstances and under what authority of law he passed an order dated February 6, 2026, directing that compensation awarded to a widow could not be released without first hearing her erstwhile counsel. The Court has also sought an explanation as to why the awarded compensation has not been released despite a clear direction passed in a Lok Adalat in 2019.
Justice Jaspreet Singh described the situation as “most unhappy” and “most alarming,” observing that the Tribunal appeared to have involved itself in infighting between two counsel, which cannot be countenanced.
The order was passed on April 3, 2026, in Matters Under Article 227 No. 1617 of 2026.
The petitioner’s husband died in a motor accident. She filed a claim petition under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which was allowed on September 29, 2007, awarding a sum of ₹7,12,000 along with interest at 6 per cent per annum. An appeal (FAFO No. 22 of 2008) was filed against the award and was subsequently decided in a Lok Adalat on September 14, 2019, whereby the Insurance Company withdrew the appeal, and the compensation was directed to be paid within 60 days from the said order.
The Court noted that despite the clear direction issued during the Lok Adalat proceedings on September 14, 2019, ensuring that the amount would be paid within six months, more than six years have elapsed and the petitioner has still not received the compensation. The petitioner has also made allegations against her counsel.
Upon perusal of the order dated February 6, 2026, passed by the Presiding Officer of the MACT, Sultanpur, the Court observed that the Tribunal had directed that the compensation amount could not be withdrawn without hearing the petitioner’s erstwhile counsel. The Court found this wholly unacceptable and questioned the authority under which such an order was passed, particularly in circumstances indicating infighting between two counsel.
The Court called upon Sri Vijay Dixit, who usually appears for the High Court, and provided him with a copy of the writ petition to seek instructions. It also directed that the order be communicated to the Presiding Officer concerned. The Presiding Officer has been directed to furnish his explanation by the next date of hearing. The matter is listed for April 10, 2026.
Case Details:
- Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Court No. 8
- Case: Matters Under Article 227 No. 1617 of 2026
- Coram: Justice Jaspreet Singh
- Date of Order: April 3, 2026
- Parties: Renoo Singh v. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, District Sultanpur & Another
!["No Loudspeakers For Azan, No Fundamental Right To Create Noise," Says Allahabad HC To Two Mosques [Read Judgment]](/secure/uploads/2020/01/lj_4995_Allahabad_HC_AZAN.jpg)
