DIVISIONAL MANAGER NEW INDIA Vs. SHAKTI PRASAD MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the Insurer challenging the judgment of the Second Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarding compensation of Rs. 70,000/ - to respondent No. 1.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the case of respondent Mo. 1 is that on 25 -10 -1988 at about 11 -30 a. m. while he was standing in front of the office of United Bank of India, Sector -19. Rourkela on Ambagaon I.G.H. road, the offending scooter bearing registration number ORE 1333 being driven rashly and negligently dashed against him. As a result of the accident, he sustained multiple injuries on his body including fracture of his left leg. He was removed to Vesaj Patel Nursing Home, Rourkela where he was treated as indoor patient for about a fort -night. He underwent operation of his left leg and steel plate was fixed on his frectured bone. He was an 'A' Class contractor under the Rourkela Steel Piant and was earning about Rs. 30,000/ - per month. On that basis he claimed a sum of Rs. 70,000/ - as compensation. The Tribunal came to hold that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending scooter and granted a sum of Rs. 70,000/ - as compensation to respondent No. 1 wih simple interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of application dated 21 -12 -1989.

(3.) IN order to appreciate the contention of the appellant, following basic facts are necessary to be noted. The accident took place on 25 -10 -1988 when the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (Old Act) was in force. The New Act came into force with effect from 1 -7 -1989. The respondent No. 1 filed the claim application Under Section 166 of the New Act on 21 -12 -1989. Thus, there was delay of about fourteen months in filing the application. Unlike corresponding provision contained in Section 110 -A (3) of the Old Act, Sub -section (3) of Section 166 of the New Act contemplates only limited power of condonation of delay in filing the claim. It states as follows ; 'No application for such compensation shall be entertained unless it is made within six months of the occurrence of the accident Provided that the Claims Tribunal may entertain the application after the expiry of the said period of six months but not later than twelve months, if it is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause from making the application in time'. It is now settled by the judgments of the Supreme Court in Vinod Gurudas Raikar v, National Insurance Co. Ltd., AIR 1991 SC 2156 and National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. (M/s. Swaranlata Das, AIR 1393 SC 1259) that in case in which the accident took place when the Old Act was in force and the claim petition was tiled after enforcemant of the New Act, question of condonation of delay would be governed by the new law (Section 166(3) of the New Act) and delay of more than six months in filing the claim petition would not be condoned.