Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 401 (RAJ)

State of Rajasthan v. Mahesh Kumar Madan

2004-03-16

PRAKASH TATIA

body2004
Judgment Prakash Tatia, J.-Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The only point involved in this appeals that whether any interest can be granted over the compensation awarded under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1988’). 3. In this case, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hanumangarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunar) awarded compensation of Rs. 50,000/-to the claimants on account of on fault liability under Section 140 of the Act of 1988. While doing so, the Tribunal also awarded interest over the said compensation 8% per annum. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the interest is not allowable in a case where any compensation awarded under Section 140 of the act of 1988. 4. I considered the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant and perused the interim award under Section 140 as well as under Section 171 of the Act of 1988. It is true that in Sub-section (2) of the Section 140 of the Act of 1988, it is mentioned that the amount of compensation, which shall be payable under Sub-section (1) of the Section 140 of the Act of 1988 shall be a fixed sum of Rs. 50.000/-in a ease of death of the victim and a fixed sum of Rs. 25,000A in a case of permanent disablement of the injured in the accident. The words “fixed sum” has direct connection only with the amount of compensation. Meaning thereby the compensation shall not be more or less, then the Rs.50,000/-on Rs. 25,000/-as the case may be. The Section 140 of the act of 1988 deals with the compensation only whereas Section 171 permits the award of interest over the compensation amount. The Section 171 says that where any Claims Tribunal allows claim for compensation under the act of 1988, which Tribunal may direct that in addition to the amount of compensation simple interest shall also be paid at such rate and from such date not earlier than the date of making the claim as it may specify in this behalf Meaning thereby the Tribunal has been given jurisdiction to awarded interest over the compensation irrespective of the fact whether awarded of compensation is under Section 140 or under Section 166 of the Act of 1988. 5. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in this appeal. 5. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in this appeal. Hence, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed and the stay order granted by this Court is vacated.