ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. PAPPU AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these writ petitions, awards passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal have been assailed by the Insurance companies on the ground inter -alia that the same are perverse and as the insurer cannot assail the same on the ground of quantum of compensation as awarded in an appeal, therefore, the insurer -petitioners cannot challenge the award on all the grounds except for the ground under Sec. 149(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act. Unless granted the permission by the claims Tribunal as envisaged under Sec. 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, he has sought or obtained. Such permission in these cases either has been declined or not sought. Therefore, it is canvassed in all these petitions that the award(s) under challenge in the Tribunal deserves to be quashed and set -aside by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary writ jurisdiction.

(2.) It is seen that after filing of these writ petitions, the law has underwent change. The Hon'ble Apex Court in United India Insurance Company Limited Versus Shila Datta and others : (2011)10 Supreme Court Cases 509; while discussing the scope of Sec. 149 (2) and also Sec. 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act and making a distinction between the insurer only as a noticee under Sec. 149(2) of the Act and impleaded as respondent in the claim petition has concluded that in the cases where the insurer has been impleaded as respondent by the claimants -petitioners it is competent to contest the claim petition on all the grounds and also competent to file an appeal even on the grounds other than those prescribed under Sec. 149(2) of the Act. As a matter of fact, in the judgment (supra) on a reference made, the three Judges Bench, has formulated the following five points: - -

(3.) Point No. 1 deals with the right of the insurer to contest a claim petition on all the grounds including on the ground of quantum of compensation awarded, in addition to the grounds mentioned under Sec. 149(2) of the Act. Similarly, point No. 2 pertains to the right of the insurer to prefer an appeal under Sec. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award, questioning therein the quantum of compensation as awarded. The discussion pertaining to these points in the judgment (supra) reads as follows: - -