IMIYA Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition by the claimant-petitioner is directed against the order dated 06. 01. 2005 as passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Barmer whereby the learned Tribunal has proceeded to allow a review application filed by the respondent No. 1 United India Insurance Company Ltd. and has recalled the order dated 24/9/2004 that was passed under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('the Act').

(2.) BRIEFLY put, the background facts and relevant aspects of the matter are that the claimant-petitioner lost her husband Sheraram in a vehicular accident that occurred on 20/7/2002 on National Highway No. 15 near Varahai for collision of two vehicles bearing registration Nos. GJ-12/w-5255 and RJ- 04/g-0755. The claimant-petitioner and the parents of the deceased Sheraram have filed a claim application under Section 166 of the Act against the drivers, owners and insurers of both the vehicles involved in the accident while stating that the victim Sheraram was occupying the cabin of the vehicle bearing registration No. GJ-12/w-5255 and died for the injuries sustained in the accident. Along with the claim application, the claimants also filed an application under Section 140 of the Act claiming interim compensation in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- while stating joint and several liability of all the persons related with the vehicles involved in the accident.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel for the contesting respondent No. 1 -insurer vehemently and elaborately contended in the first place that the petitioner is not entitled for any relief in the writ jurisdiction of this Court and the impugned order calls for no interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India; and in that regard referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sadhana Lodh vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. and another: 2003 (2) WLC (SC) 255 and of this Court in Manikyapuri Housing Coop. Society vs. Mahesh Chaturvedi and another: 2004 (1) WLC (Raj.) 389 = RLW 2004 (3) Raj. 1677. Learned counsel further contended that the petitioner could have challenged the order impugned by way of a regular appeal under Section 173 of the Act and in that view of the matter also, no interference is called for under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel further submitted that the review application as moved before the Tribunal was competent because the Rules under the Motor Vehicles Act are silent in that regard and the principles of Code of Civil Procedure would apply particularly when the Tribunal has all the trappings of Civil Court. Learned counsel submitted that when the basic questions involved in this matter are required to be decided at the time of final decision of the claim application, no case for interference is made out under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel also submitted that the respondent-insurer had rightly moved the review application and the Tribunal has rightly recalled the order earlier passed; and that the claimants having concealed the facts about the relevant Final Report, are not entitled for any relief.