JUDGMENT M. Katju, J.
1. Admit.
2. Issue notice to the respondents.
3. This appeal has been filed by Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short referred to as 'the Act'). It has been held in a series of decisions by the Apex Court and this Court, e.g., in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nicolletta Rohtagi , that unless the conditions precedent specified in Section 170 are satisfied an insurance company has no right of appeal unless it is on the ground mentioned in Section 149(2). Section 170 of the aforesaid Act states that the insurance company can be impleaded provided the Tribunal for the reasons to be recorded in writing, is satisfied that there is collusion between the claimant and the opposite party or that the opposite party has failed to contest the claim. Thus, from a perusal of the aforesaid section it is obvious that the Tribunal before impleading the insurance company has to record its reasons in writing about satisfaction of conditions mentioned in Clause (a) or (b) of Section 170.
4. In the present case, the Tribunal has decided the application of the insurance company under Section 170 by a single word 'allowed'. No reason has been recorded in writing by the Tribunal. In fact in appeal after appeal coming up before us we find that no reason has been recorded by the learned Tribunal while allowing the impleadment application of the insurance company under Section 170. This is in the teeth of the statutory requirement of Section 170 of the Act which requires reasons to be recorded in writing.
5. Learned Counsel for the appellant, however, has relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Jyotsnaben Sudhirbhai Patel . In that case also the Tribunal had allowed the application of the insurer by passing an order 'granted as prayed for' without giving any reason. The Supreme Court held that the appeal of the insurer should not be dismissed on this ground because that would penalise the insurer who will suffer prejudice for no fault of his.
6. Since we are bound by the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court, we have to respectfully follow it in view of Article 141 of the Constitution. However, we are issuing a general direction to all the Motor Accident Claims Tribunals in the State of U.P. that in future they must record reasons in writing before allowing any application under Section 170 of the Act since that is a statutory requirement of Section 170. Failure to do so may invite disciplinary action against the Judge of the Tribunal by this Court under its general supervisory powers.
7. Let the Registrar General of this Court send a copy of this order to all the District Judges of the District Courts in the State of U.P. who will in turn communicate it to all the Motor Accident Claims Tribunals in their districts and such Tribunals shall comply with this direction in future and record the reasons while disposing of the application under Section 170.
8. Let a copy of this order be also sent to the Administrative Committee of this Court for appropriate directions.