Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 347 (PAT)

Nusharat Khatton v. Shashi Mohan Yadav

2012-02-27

RAKESH KUMAR

body2012
ORDER Heard Sri Satyanand Shukla, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Ashok Priyadarshi, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of the Respondent no.4/Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd. both on appeal as well as on Interlocutory Application i.e. I.A. No.9775 of 2010 for condoning the delay in filing the appeal. 2. The present appeal has been preferred after four months 10 days of expiry of period of limitation. 3. Heard both the parties. In view of ground set forth in the Interlocutory Application, the delay in filing the appeal stands condoned and Interlocutory Application i.e. I.A. No.9775 of 2010 stands allowed. 4. The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as “the M.V. Act”) has been preferred for modifying the Judgment dated 25.01.2010 and Award dated 25.03.2010 in Claim Case No. 3/2003 passed by the District Judge-cum-Claim Tribunal, Samastipur (hereinafter referred to as the “Claims Tribunal”) to the extent of directing for payment of interest from the date of filing of the claim petition before the Claims Tribunal and also for payment of amount of consortium , funeral expenses etc. to the tune of Rs.9,500/-. By the impugned Judgment and Award, the Claims Tribunal has directed the insurer of the offending vehicle i.e. Respondent no.4 to pay the compensation amount of Rs.4,32,000/- after deducting Rs.50,000/-, which was already paid as interim compensation under Section 140 of the M.V. Act.. The said amount does not include either amount of consortium or the amount of funeral expenses etc. to the tune of Rs.9,500/-. The Claims Tribunal has further directed to pay the compensation amount within three months from the date of receipt of the order with interest @ 6% per annum. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the amount of interest was required to be paid from the date of filing of the claim petition, which has not been done by the Claims Tribunal nor the Claims Tribunal has directed for payment of the amount of consortium, funeral expenses etc. to the tune of Rs.9, 500/- . 5. to the tune of Rs.9, 500/- . 5. Since the insurer of the vehicle has not preferred any appeal against the Judgment and Award and the insurer has been directed to pay the compensation amount, the Court is of the opinion that without issuing any notice to non-appearing Respondents i.e. Respondent nos.1 to 3 and 5, the appeal can be disposed of. Similarly, there is no requirement to discuss the merit of the case. 6. Fact remains that by the Judgment and Award in Claim Case No.3 of 2003, the Claims Tribunal has directed the insurer /Respondent no.4 to make payment of compensation amount as indicated above. At the same time, the learned Claims Tribunal has committed error in not directing the insurer to pay interest, as has been indicated @ 6 % per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. The learned Claims Tribunal has also not whispered regarding the amount of consortium, funeral expenses etc. 7. Though, Sri Ashok Priyadarshi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent no.4/ United India Insurance Company Ltd. has opposed the prayer of the appellants, there is no material to be pleaded by Sri Pridarshi that the claimants/appellants were not entitled to get the interest from the date of filing of the claim petition and also the amount of consortium , funeral expenses etc. to the tune of Rs.9,500/-. 8. Accordingly, the appeal stands allowed modifying the impugned Judgment and Award to the extent that the insurer/Respondent no.4 shall pay the total amount of Rs.9, 500/- as the amount of consortium, funeral expenses etc. and also to pay interest @ 6% per annum on the amount of compensation from the date of filing of the claim petition before the Claims Tribunal. 9. The aforesaid amount must be paid within a period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With above observation and direction, the appeal stands allowed.