The Supreme Court clarified the territorial jurisdiction of Motor Accident Claims Tribunals under Section 166(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. In K. Rashik v. National Insurance Company Ltd. and Another, the claimant filed a compensation petition before the Chennai Tribunal following a road accident in Andhra Pradesh. The insurer challenged jurisdiction because the accident occurred outside Chennai and the claimant's pleadings did not establish residence or business activities there. The Court explained that compensation claims may be filed where the accident occurred, where the claimant resides or carries on business, or where the defendant resides. However, the mere existence of an insurance company's branch office within a particular jurisdiction does not independently confer territorial jurisdiction upon the Tribunal. The Court further held that an insurer formally impleaded as a respondent can raise objections concerning jurisdiction. Although the Motor Vehicles Act is beneficial legislation, its provisions cannot be interpreted contrary to their statutory language. Consequently, the Supreme Court upheld the transfer of proceedings to the appropriate Tribunal in Chittoor, Andhra Pradesh. The judgment clarifies jurisdictional objections, insurer participation and statutory interpretation.