High CourtsSingle Bench(2019) 12 JH CK 0129

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited vs Raj Kishor Mahato And Ors

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 9 December 2019

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kailash Prasad Deo, J
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Appeal No. 369 Of 2019

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

38 paragraphs · 723 words

Appellant- Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited is before this Court.

The instant appeal has been preferred against the award dated 25.05.2019 passed by Presiding Officer, Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal,

Ranchi in Motor Accident Claim Case No.208 of 2015 whereby the claimants have been awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.11,62,400/- under

Section 166 of the MV Act along with simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of admission of the claim application under Section 166 of the

MV Act i.e. 30.09.2015.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the award is bad in law as learned Tribunal has not taken note of provisions of Section 169(2)

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 rather proceeded ex-parte against the owner who has not appeared in spite of due service of summons. The claim

application was fixed ex-parte vide order 20.08.2016.

Section 169(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 reads as follows:-

“169. Procedure and powers of Claims Tribunal-

(2) The Claims Tribunal shall have all the powers of a Civil Court for the purpose of taking evidence on oath and of enforcing the

attendance of witnesses and of compelling the discovery and production of documents and material objects and for such other purposes as

may be prescribed, and the Claims Tribunal shall be deemed to be a Civil Court for all the purposes of Section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(2 of 1974).â€​

Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the appeal has been filed within time, as such, notice may be issued upon owner of the

offending vehicle, respondent no.4- Prabhuman Sharma, S/o J.P. Sharma Resident of Qr. No.G.G.-20 Civil Township P.S. Raghunath Palli, P.O.

Rourkela Sunderghar, Orissa, so as to have right of recovery against the owner of the offending vehicle.

This Court after going through provisions of Section 169 of the Motor Vehicle Act made query to the learned counsel for the appellant:-

(i) Why the provisions under Rules 234 and 235 of the Jharkhand Motor Vehicle Rules 1992 has not been invoked at the Tribunal stage?

(ii) Why an application was not filed that in absence of the owner of the vehicle, the adjudication of Motor Accident Claim Tribunal shall prejudice the

interest of the insurer of the vehicle?

Be that as it may, let notice be issued upon the owner/respondent no.4 on the aforesaid address under both process i.e. under registered cover with

A/D as well as under ordinary process for which requisites etc. must be filed within two weeks, as to why the liability should not be shifted upon

him/insured instead of insurer Insurance Company?

In the meantime, the Insurance Company shall deposit the entire awarded amount along with interest within 90 days from today before the learned

Tribunal as the claimants- Raj Kishor Mahato, Tushar Ranjan and Raksha Anand have not been paid compensation amount. On deposit of the same,

the learned Tribunal is directed to release the Principal amount in favour of the claimants after notice and due verification.

So far the interest part is concerned that shall be deposited in a fixed deposit account so as to disburse the same to the claimants after disposal of the

appeal or returned to the Insurance Company.

Learned counsel for the appellant has further assailed the impugned award on the ground that interest has been awarded @ 9% from the date of

admission of the claim application i.e. 30.09.2015 without giving any reason instead of 7.5% from the date of filing of the claim application, as laid

down in the case of Dharmpal and Sons Vs. UP State Road Transport Corporation, 2008 (4) JCR 79 SC.

Let notice be issued to the respondent nos.1- Raj Kishor Mahato, S/o Late Naresh Mahto, 2. Tushar Ranjan, S/o Raj Kishore Mahto and 3. Raksha

Anand, D/o Raj Kishore Mahto (Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are minors being represented through their father respondent no.1 as their natural guardian

and next friend), all Residents of Village- Langhatu Kalwadih, P.O. & P.S. Silli District- Ranchi under both process i.e. under registered cover with

A/D as well as under ordinary process for which requisites etc. must be filed within two weeks as to why the interest part may not be reduced from

9% to 7.5% per annum.

List this miscellaneous appeal after notice upon all the respondents.