Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 2594 (RAJ)

Satyadan Singh v. Guman Singh

2008-11-25

N.K.JAIN

body2008
Judgment Hon'ble JAIN J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Admit. Shri J.K. Singhi appears for the contesting respondents. With the consent of the learned counsel for both the parties, the appeal was heard finally and is being disposed of. 3. The Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants have preferred this appeal only on one ground i.e. that the learned Tribunal has committed an illegality in not awarding the interest on the amount of compensation from the date of claim application and in awarding the same only from the date of award. 4. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur vide its impugned award dated 8.11.2004 passed in Motor Accident Claim Case No.369/98 passed an award in favour of claimant-appellants for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- in respect of the death of Vinod who died on 26.10.1997 from the injuries sustained by him in motor accident took place on 13.10.1997. The Tribunal also awarded interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of award. 5. The only submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the interest should have been awarded from the date of claim application and not from the date of award. 6. The learned counsel for the respondents contended that it is a discretion of the Tribunal to award interest from which date. He submits that the Tribunal has not committed any illegality in awarding interest from the date of award. 7. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 8. The sole question involved in the present case is as to whether the appellants are entitled to get interest on the amount of award from the date of application or from the date of award passed by the Tribunal. 9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smt. Chameli Wati and another v/s Delhi Municipal Corporation of Delhi and others (AIR 1986 Supreme Court 1191) held that the interest must be paid on enhanced amount of compensation from the date of application for compensation and not from the date of award. The Apex Court also held that it is undoubtedly true that court had discretion to award interest at such rate and from such date not earlier than the date of application as it may think fit in the exercise of its discretion. The Apex Court also held that it is undoubtedly true that court had discretion to award interest at such rate and from such date not earlier than the date of application as it may think fit in the exercise of its discretion. But it is well settled that every discretion conferred by statute must be exercised judicially on the basis of the facts and circumstances of a particular case. The Apex Court further held that the learned Single Judge as well as Division Bench of the High Court totally ignored the fact that the enhanced amount of compensation awarded by them was in their judgment the correct amount of compensation payable to the appellants on account of the death of the deceased resulting from the accident. Para 2 of the judgment is reproduced as under : “We are of the view that the Division Bench of the High Court erred in the exercise of its discretion under Section 110-CC of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 in not awarding interest on the amount of compensation finally determined by it from the date of the application. It is undoubtedly true that under Sec. 110-CC, the Division Bench of the High Court had discretion to award interest at such rate and from such date not earlier than the date of the application as it may think fit in the exercise of its discretion. But it is well settled that every discretion conferred by statute must be exercised judicially on the basis of the facts and circumstances of a particular case. Here when the learned Single Judge enhanced the amount of compensation, he awarded interest on the enhanced amount @ 6% per annum from the date of his judgment and the Division Bench also when it further enhanced the amount of compensation, directed that interest at the rate of 6% per annum be paid on the enhanced amount from the date of its judgment and not from the date of the application. The learned Single Judge as well as the Division Bench totally ignored the fact that the enhanced amount of compensation awarded by them was in their judgment the correct amount of compensation payable to the appellants on account of the death of the deceased resulting from the accident. The learned Single Judge as well as the Division Bench totally ignored the fact that the enhanced amount of compensation awarded by them was in their judgment the correct amount of compensation payable to the appellants on account of the death of the deceased resulting from the accident. The learned Single Judge and the Division Bench should have therefore awarded interest on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of the application. We accordingly set aside the judgment of the Division Bench as also the judgment of the learned Single Judge in so far as these judgments direct that interest shall be payable on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of the respective judgments and instead, we direct that interest shall be payable on the enhanced amount of compensation as finally determined by the Division Bench at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the application for compensation. The respondents will of course get credit for the amounts already paid by them to the appellants from time to time and interest shall be calculated taking into account such payments. The amount directed to be paid to the appellants under this order shall be paid within 2 months from today. The respondents will pay the costs of the appellants quantified at Rs.5,000/-” 10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court again in Mohinder Kaur & Ors. vs. Hira Nand Sindhi (Ghoriwala) & Anr. (MACD 2008 (SC 153) held that the claimant is entitled to get interest from the date of filing of claim petition. Para 2 of the judgment is reproduced as under : “This petition is filed against the order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. In addition to the award passed by the Tribunal, the High Court was pleased to grant Rs.50,000/- for loss of consortium with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of passing of the order, i.e. 18.8.2004 till the date of realisation instead from the date of filing of the petition i.e., 20.5.1982. Petitioner claims that she should have been allowed to have interest from 20.5.1982, i.e., from the date of filing of the petition before the Tribunal. We therefore, allow interest at the rate of 9 per cent annum on the amount of Rs.50,000/- from the date of filing of the petition i.e. from 20.5.1982.” 11. Petitioner claims that she should have been allowed to have interest from 20.5.1982, i.e., from the date of filing of the petition before the Tribunal. We therefore, allow interest at the rate of 9 per cent annum on the amount of Rs.50,000/- from the date of filing of the petition i.e. from 20.5.1982.” 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dharampal & Ors v/s U.P. State Road Transport Corporation (MACD 2008 (SC) 298) held that the claimants would be entitled to be paid interest on the amount of award from the date of application till the date of payment. 12. In view of the above discussions, it is clear that law on the aforesaid point is well settled and accordingly it is held that claimant-appellants are entitled to get interest on the amount of award from the date of claim application and not from the date of award only. 13. In view of the above discussions, the appeal is allowed. The impugned award passed by the Tribunal is modified and it is directed that the appellants shall be entitled for interest on the amount of award of Rs.4,00,000/-from the date of claim application till the actual date of payment and not from the date of award as directed by the Tribunal. Cost is made easy.