LAWS(CAL)-2009-8-43

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. PROBIR GANGULY

Decided On August 27, 2009
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Appellant
V/S
PROBIR GANGULY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is at the instance of the Insurance Company in a proceeding under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act and is directed against an award dated 30th April, 2003 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, 11th Court, Alipore, in M. A. C. Case No. 92 of 1996 thereby awarding a sum of rs. 2,99,000/- as compensation against the loss of earning capacity. After arriving at such figure, the learned Tribunal below decided to reduce the said amount to Rs. 2,55,000/- as the claimant had in the claim-application limited his claim to the said amount. The learned Tribunal further held that on a previous occasion a sum of Rs. 55,000/- as compensation was received by the claimant by way of mutual settlement with the Insurance Company and, therefore, the said sum of Rs. 55,000/- should be further deducted and, thus, the Insurance company was directed to pay Rs. 2 lakh as compensation within two months from the date of the said order with a further clause that in default of such payment within the said time, the amount of compensation should carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the application till actual payment. Being dissatisfied, the Insurance Company has come up with the present appeal.

(2.) THERE is no dispute as regards the involvement of the errant vehicle insured by the National Insurance Company Ltd. , the appellant before us, and the fact that the victim was injured due to such accident on 10th July, 1993. It appears from record that after the accident, there was a settlement between the claimant who is an Officer of the Calcutta Police Force and the Insurance company under a scheme known as Jald Rahat Yojana Scheme and pursuant to such agreement, the claimant received a sum of Rs. 55,000/- as compensation from the Insurance Company in full and final settlement of the dispute. In spite of receiving the said amount, the victim subsequently filed an application under Section 166 of the Act thereby giving rise to M. A. C. Case No. 92 of 1996 on the ground that he was entitled to get further compensation of rs. 2,55,000/- as mentioned earlier.

(3.) AFTER entering appearance in the proceeding, the Insurance Company filed an application disputing the maintainability of the application under Section 166 of the Act on the ground that in the past there being a settlement between the parties, no further application under Section 166 of the Act was maintainable. The learned Tribunal, however, rejected the said application vide Order No. 30 dated 10th August, 1999 with a finding that the application under Section 166 of the Act was maintainable in spite of earlier settlement between the parties out of court.