B K FILLING STATION Vs. HARISHCHANDRALAL SHRIVASTAVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the owner of the vehicle against the award dated 12.5.2000 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Satna in Claim Case No. 6 of 1999, whereby the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 3,60,000 as compensation to the claimants, respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

(2.) THE respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed an application for compensation against the death of Anju Shrivastava aged about 19 years in an accident on 4.4.1997. It was alleged that Anju was travelling in jeep bearing registration No. MP 24-D 5856. In the course of her journey, tanker bearing registration No. MP 19-8751 coming from opposite direction collided with the jeep resulting in death of Munnilal, driver of the said jeep, Anju Shrivastava and Sadhna Gupta, passengers of the said jeep. THE tanker was owned by appellant Bal Krishna Agrawal, driven by Munim Singh, respondent No. 3 and insured by respondent No. 4.

(3.) ON the other hand, Mrs. Amrit Ruprah, learned counsel for the appellant drew my attention to order dated 26.7.2002 by which this appeal was admitted and on stay this court directed to deposit the balance amount of compensation with the Claims Tribunal within two months. She submitted that the insurance company, respondent No. 5, deposited a sum of Rs. 50,000 as interim compensation in compliance to order passed in an application under section 140 of the Act and thereafter a further sum of Rs. 1,30,000 had already been deposited. She further submitted that requirement of first proviso to section 173 of the Act is deposit of minimum Rs. 25,000 or 50 per cent of the amount awarded by the Tribunal whichever is less. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in accordance with the provisions of section 141 of the Act, the interim compensation for 'no fault liability' awarded under section 140 is to be taken into account for determining the quantum of compensation payable under the final award based on finding of fault or commission of tort by the owner and driver of the vehicle involved in the accident. She further submits that if the award of interim compensation merges in the final award and the payment already made under the former award satisfies the requirement of proviso to section 173, the appeal cannot be held as not maintainable for want of requisite deposit. In support of the said contention, she drew my attention to a Division Bench decision of this court in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Gopal Singh, 2000 ACJ 255 (MP) and Division Bench decision of Madras High Court in the case of P. Anwer Batcha v. Tamilarasai, 2002 ACJ 931 (Madras). In the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Gopal Singh (supra) the Division Bench has held the following in para 19 which reads as under: