JUDGMENT : 1. C.A.N. 1817 of 2018 is an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of 66 days delay in presentation of F.M.A.T. 173 of 2018, being an appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereafter the ‘Act), whereas C.A.N. 1819 of 2018 is an application for stay of operation of the impugned award filed in the said appeal. 2. We have heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the averments made in the application for condonation of delay. 3. Cause shown is sufficient. Delay in presentation of the appeal (F.M.A.T. 173 of 2018) is condoned. 4. C.A.N. 1817 of 2018 is allowed. 5. Register the appeal, if it is otherwise in form. While considering the question of interim relief, we have looked into the impugned award dated September 12, 2017 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal presided over by the learned Judge, VIth Bench, City Civil Court, Kolkata in M.A.C.C Case No. 458 of 2007. 6. In a motor accident, the respondent no.1 (hereafter the ‘claimant’) was severely injured. A medical board constituted by the Howrah District Hospital has assessed his disability to the extent of 70%. Considering the evidence that was led in course of trial, the tribunal was of the view that the claimant is entitled to compensation of Rs. 20,56,800/- (Rupees Twenty Lacs Fifty Six Thousand and Eight Hundred only) together with interest @ 1% per month from the date of filing of the claim application till its realisation, payable by the insurer of the offending vehicle. 7. It is submitted by Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned advocate for the applicant/appellant (hereafter the ‘appellant’) that the claimant having initiated execution proceedings, giving rise to M.A.C. Execution Case No. 68 of 2017, the appellant has deposited an account payee cheque for a sum of Rs. 46,27,000/- (Forty Six Lacs Twenty Seven Thousand only) in the name of the claimant acting in compliance with an order passed in such proceedings and that the claimant has also filed a petition to allow him receive the said cheque. 8. Various points are urged by Mr. Bhattacharjee in support of his contention that the claimant is not entitled to the sum of Rs. 20,56,800/- (Rupees Twenty Lacs Fifty Six Thousand and Eight Hundred) awarded by the tribunal. We shall consider these points at the time of hearing of the appeal. 9. 8. Various points are urged by Mr. Bhattacharjee in support of his contention that the claimant is not entitled to the sum of Rs. 20,56,800/- (Rupees Twenty Lacs Fifty Six Thousand and Eight Hundred) awarded by the tribunal. We shall consider these points at the time of hearing of the appeal. 9. The claimant appears in person. It is submitted by him that due to financial stringency, it has not been possible for him to engage an advocate to argue the case on his behalf. 10. Mr. Ashique Mondal, learned advocate at this stage has informed us that initially the claimant had executed a vakalatnama and requested Mr. Mondal to appear on his behalf. However, after expiry of the statutory period, no fresh caveat was filed as a result of which he is disabled to represent the claimant. 11. The claimant reiterates before us that without any payment having been released in his favour and he being out of employment since the accident, which occurred on April 27, 2007, it is not possible for him to afford the expenses of an advocate. 12. We record our appreciation for Mr. Mondal, who has agreed to represent the claimant without charging any fees until the appeal is disposed of. We record that the claimant has executed a fresh vakalatnama in favour of Mr. Mondal, which has been filed in court today. 13. Appearing for the claimant, Mr. Mondal has submitted that in majority of the claim cases where the claim applications are allowed by the tribunals, simple interest at varying rates are awarded to be calculated on yearly basis but this is an exceptional case where the proceedings continued indefinitely before the tribunal because of the laches of the appellant/insurer and that is the reason why interest @ 1% per month was awarded by the tribunal. It is also submitted by him that the grounds raised in the appeal are not worthy of interfering with the impugned judgment and award. In any event, he submits that a part of the compensation, which has been secured by the appellant/insurer before the tribunal, may be released in favour of the claimant for his survival. 14. Having heard Mr. Bhattacharjee and Mr. In any event, he submits that a part of the compensation, which has been secured by the appellant/insurer before the tribunal, may be released in favour of the claimant for his survival. 14. Having heard Mr. Bhattacharjee and Mr. Mondal and on consideration of the papers/materials before us, we are of the considered opinion that interest of justice would be sufficiently served, at least at this stage, if the tribunal upon encashment of the cheque is directed to invest Rs. 36,27,000/- (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Twenty Seven Thousand only) in an auto-renewable fixed deposit account of a nationalised bank until further orders are passed in the appeal. It is ordered accordingly. 15. The balance sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only) shall be released in favour of the claimant without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties in the appeal and on the specific undertaking given by him through Mr. Mondal to the effect that should the appeal succeed and the award of the tribunal be ultimately set aside, he shall be liable to pay back Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only) to the appellant/insurer. If an approach is made before the tribunal by the claimant, it shall not waste any time to release the aforesaid sum in favour of the claimant. 16. If, however, the cheque has been issued by the appellant in favour of the claimant, the tribunal shall direct the appellant to issue two cheques, one in favour of the claimant for Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only) and the other favouring the Registrar, City Civil Court for Rs. 36,27,000/- (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Twenty Seven Thousand only) within a week. Upon presentation of these two cheques before it, the tribunal shall (i) return to the appellant the cheque for Rs. 46,27,000/- (Rupees Forty Six Lacs Twenty Seven Thousand only), (ii) hand over to the claimant the cheque for Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only) and (iii) invest Rs. 36,27,000/- (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Twenty Seven Thousand only) in the maner as directed above. 17. We propose to hear out the appeal finally without insisting for preparation of formal paper books. With that in view, we direct that the lower court records be called for by special messenger at the cost of the claimant. Such cost should be deposited by the claimant in course of tomorrow. 18. 17. We propose to hear out the appeal finally without insisting for preparation of formal paper books. With that in view, we direct that the lower court records be called for by special messenger at the cost of the claimant. Such cost should be deposited by the claimant in course of tomorrow. 18. As soon as the lower court records reach this Court, the same shall be tagged with the file and placed before us. 19. Since the owner of the offending vehicle did not contest the proceedings before the tribunal, we dispense with service of notice of appeal on him. 20. The appeal shall be listed under the heading ‘For Orders’ on July 17, 2018. 21. The tribunal and all parties shall act on a website copy of this order, duly authenticated by Mr. Bhattacharjee and Mr. Mondal jointly.