STATE OF HARYANA Vs. USHA ATRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity the Code) is directed against the order dated 11.1.2001 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karnal (for brevity 'the Tribunal') directing the judgment-debtor petitioners to deposit a sum of Rs. 1,08,272.84 more alongwith interest @ 12 percent from 1.10.2000 upto the date.

(2.) FACTS necessary for deciding the controversy raised are that the decree holder-respondents (for brevity, 'the DH-respondents') filed a claim petition on 29.5.1982. The claim petition succeeded and an award was made on 2.3.1983 by the Tribunal for payment of an amount of Rs. 90,000/-. Against the order passed by the Tribunal, the DH-respondents approached the High Court by filing F.A.O. No. 667 of 1983. The High Court enhanced the amount of compensation vide its order dated 29.7.1987 directing the payment to the tune of Rs. 1,50,000/-. The decree holder-respondents still felt dissatisfied and filed an appeal bearing L.P.A. No. 798 of 1987 and the Letters Patent Bench vide its order dated 17.8.1999 further enhanced the compensation to Rs. 2,04,000/-.

(3.) FEELING dissatisfied with the payment of amount of Rs. 1,03,454.03 on 5.1.1985 and Rs. 1,12,352.00 on 21.12.1987, the DH-respondents filed an execution application claiming more payment as it was argued that the earlier payment made to him is far less than the awarded amount. On the basis of the arguments that payment of interest cannot be confined to the enhanced amount awarded by the learned Single Judge on 29.7.1987 and then upto the date of the judgment of Letters Patent Bench i.e. 17.8.1999, the decree-holder respondent claimed the enhanced amount as awarded by the Letters Patent Bench from the date of the application i.e. 29.5.1982 alongwith interest. Another argument raised was that the decree holder is entitled to apportion the awarded amount received towards costs, then towards interest and then towards additional amount.