NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. NAJO KHATOON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the order dated 16.2.1996 granting compensation of Rs. 50,000 to the claimants-respondents and it was directed to be paid by the appellant (New India Assurance Co. Ltd.).

(2.) Appellants lawyer submitted that in the instant case, vehicle in question was ensured with the insurance company on 10.1.1995 from 4 p.m., whereas the accident took place at 12 noon of the aforesaid date. So, the insurance company was not liable to pay any compensation to claimants of the case. In this connection, learned lawyer for the driver of the vehicle in question bearing registration No. BER 8421 (respondent No. 3) submitted that this misc. appeal is not maintainable in view of the fact that it is directed against an order which is not an award within the meaning of Section 149(7) of the Motor Vehicles Act, Explanation. He further submitted that this misc. appeal was also not maintainable because the appellant did not take leave of the Tribunal to file an appeal. He lastly submitted that the policy commenced on 10.1.1995 and was valid till 9.1.1996. So, the policy will start from zero hour on 10.1.1995 and will continue till 12 p.m. on 9.1.1996. So, the time of occurrence was well covered by the insurance policy.

(3.) I shall first dispose of the contention that the impugned order did not indicate that it was an award. Section 168 has laid down that on receipt of an application under Section 166 of the aforesaid Act, the Tribunal shall proceed to enquire into the claim and after hearing the concerned party specify the amount which shall be paid by the owner or the insurance company or the driver in question. It has further been laid down there that where such an application makes a claim of compensation under Section 140, Motor Vehicles Act in respect of the death or permanent disablement of any person, such claim under Section 140 of the Act shall be disposed of under Chapter X of the aforesaid Act. So, the award as mentioned under Section 168 of the Act referred to an amount of compensation which may be final or interim. Section 140 of the Act has made provision for grant of compensation on the basis of no fault liability of the driver of the vehicle which causes accident. So, interim compensation granted under Section 140 of the Act will be covered by the word award as mentioned under Section 168 of the Act. So, the contention of the respondents lawyer that this appeal is not maintainable because the impugned order is not an award, is not sustainable.