(1.) The parties were put to notice on the earlier date that the appeal will be heard finally at the stage of admission. Accordingly, the appeal was taken up for final hearing. The learned counsel for the first to third respondents on instructions states that the said respondents do not desire to prefer either cross-appeal or cross-objection for challenging the impugned judgment and Award. We accept the said statement. Before we proceed to deal with the facts of the case and the submissions canvassed by the learned counsel for the contesting parties, we may note that initially this appeal was placed before the learned single Judge. The learned single Judge by order dated 2nd August, 2012 came to the conclusion that the appeal pertains to the jurisdiction of the Division Bench. When we called upon the registry to submit an explanation as to why the appeal was placed before the learned single Judge, the Registrar (Judicial-I) has placed on record order dated 6th December, 2010 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in First Appeal No. 1675 of 2010. It is pointed out to us that on the basis of the said order, the appeal was placed before the learned single Judge.
(2.) The appeal arises out of an Award made by the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mumbai. The first to third respondents are the claimants in the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). The original claim for compensation was in the sum of Rs. 3,20,00,000/-. By the impugned judgment and Award, the compensation has been fixed at Rs. 50,75,000/- with interest thereon at the rate of 8.5% p.a. from the date of claim application till realization of the amount.
(3.) The challenge in this appeal preferred by the appellant-insurer is confined to the compensation amount to the extent of Rs. 14,91,000/-. In short, the impugned award to the extent of the rest of the amount of the compensation over and above the sum of Rs. 14,91,000/- awarded including the interest part has been accepted by the appellant insurer. The fourth respondent insured did not contest the claim application. As the original claim was in the sum of Rs. 3,20,00,000/-, for the purpose of jurisdiction, the appeal has been correctly valued at Rs. 3,20,00000/- and for the purpose of Court fees, the same has been rightly valued at Rs. 14,91,000/-.