UNITRD INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. ANITA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. , insurer of the offending vehicle, has preferred an appeal challenging the impugned order dated 21/11/2007 passed by learned M. A. C. T. The impugned award has arisen out of the claim petition filed by the respondent No. 1 against the appellant as well as against respondent Nos. 6 and 7 claiming compensation for the death of Ashok Kumar.

(2.) THE brief facts which are necessary for deciding the present appeal, inter alia, are that on 2/2/2006 at about 11 a. m. the deceased Ashok Kumar was travelling by tsr bearing No. DL 1r-E 2032. When he had reached at Outer Ring Road, Curt service Road, Vijay Ghat, suddenly the tsr turned upside down due to the rash and negligent driving. As a result thereof, ashok Kumar fell down on the road along with the TSR and due to which he died. The Claims Tribunal after taking into consideration the facts of the case as well as evidence led by the parties had passed an award vide order dated 21/11/2007 in the sum of Rs. 13,46,000 along with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum payable from the date of the filing of the petition till its realisation. The said order passed by the Tribunal is now under challenge in the present appeal.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the appellant at considerable length. Appeal is liable to be dismissed at the admission stage itself as the very maintainability of the appeal is in dispute. Appellant cannot assail the findings of the Tribunal on the quantum of compensation as determined by the Tribunal. The appellant had not taken over the defence of the owner and driver as envisaged under section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act and, therefore, is debarred from challenging the impugned award so as to assail the findings of the tribunal on the quantum of compensation. Counsel for appellant vehemently disputes this position and contends that the insurer cannot be rendered remediless especially in a case where the Tribunal has awarded an excessive amount of compensation in favour of the claimants ignoring all basic principles of law for the award of compensation. Counsel for the appellant has also placed reliance upon the judgment of the supreme Court in New India Assurance co. Ltd. v. Shanti Pathak, 2007 ACJ 2188 (SC), to contend that the Apex Court had interfered to lower down the compensation amount even in a case where the insurer had not taken any permission from the court under section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Counsel for the appellant also contends that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has already referred the said issue of lack of competence of the insurer to assail the findings of the Tribunal on the ground of quantum of compensation and negligence to a larger Bench and, therefore, this court may follow the decision of the Supreme court in this regard.