Bombay High Court
Cholamandalam M.S. General ... vs Smt. Vatsalabai Tryambak Dangare ... on 6 April, 2021
Bench: P. K. Chavan
16-CAF-3785-2018.doc
Shailaja
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3785 OF 2018
IN
FIRST APPEAL [STAMP] NO.16916 OF 2018
Cholamandalam M.S. General Insurance ]
Co. Ltd through it's Manager. ] Applicant
Vs.
Vatsalabai Tryambak Dangare and others. ] Respondents
.....
Ms. Deepika Prabhala i/b Res Juris, for Applicant.
Mr. R.M. Haridas, for Respondent No.1.
.....
CORAM : PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.
DATE : 6th APRIL, 2021.
P.C.
1. On 17th October, 2018, this Court (Coram: Dr. Shalini
Phansalkar-Joshi, J.) after hearing Ms. Prabhala, learned Counsel
for the appellant-Insurer stayed execution and implementation of
the impugned judgment and award dated 19th August, 2017
passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Niphad, Dist.
Nashik in M.A.C.P No.5 of 2013 mainly relying upon the
contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant that the
respondents-claimants have already availed an amount of
1 of 4
16-CAF-3785-2018.doc
Rs.3,40,620/- under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 as
per the compromise arrived at between the parties before Lok
Adalat.
2. Learned Counsel for the appellant-insurer relied on section
167 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by contending that an option
has been given to a person entitled to claim compensation either
to approach one of the two Forums.
3. It is a matter of record that the compromise arrived at before
the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Judge,
Labour Court, Dhule was between wife of the deceased and the
insurer. Admittedly, respondent No.1-Vatsalabai Tryambak Dangare
who was an aged mother of the deceased was not a party before
that Forum. In view of Section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act, her
right cannot be thwarted to choose an option of approaching
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Submission of the learned
Counsel of the appellant-insurer made before this Court, therefore,
cannot be countenanced to hold that the respondents-claimants
have settled the claim in Lok Adalat before Commissioner for
Workmen's Compensation and Judge, Labour Court. However, this
Court in an order dated 17th October, 2018, while granting stay,
did not direct the appellant-insurer to deposit the amount of
compensation.
4. Mr. Haridas, learned Counsel for respondent No.1 submitted
that the facts as stated above, which according to him, are
factually incorrect to the extent that respondent No.1 - Vatsalabai
2 of 4
16-CAF-3785-2018.doc
was a party before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation
and Judge, Labour Court.
5. It is pertinent to note that the appellant-insurer was a party
before both the Forums and, therefore, it ought to have
ascertained the facts. No stand of Section 167 of the Motor
Vehicles Act has been raised in the written statement by the
appellant-insurer before M.A.C.T.
6. In light of the aforesaid facts, the appellant-insurer is
directed to deposit entire amount of compensation with accrued
interest within four weeks from today, in the Tribunal.
7. Ms. Prabhala is fair enough to submit that the appellant-
insurer would deposit the said amount within four weeks from
today, failing which, order granting stay to the execution of the
impugned award shall stand vacated without further reference to
the Court.
8. After depositing the amount under Award, liberty to
respondent No.1 to withdraw 50% of the amount of compensation
with accrued interest upon furnishing an undertaking that in case,
the appellant-insurer succeeds in the appeal, she will refund the
amount with interest at such rate as would be directed by this
Court subject to the outcome of the appeal.
3 of 4
16-CAF-3785-2018.doc
9. Interest on the decretal amount shall be calculated till 17 th
October, 2018.
10. List the matter for compliance on 4th May, 2021.
[PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.]
4 of 4
