Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Chitra Mandal @ Mondal & Ors vs M/S. Shriram General Insurance ... on 14 July, 2023
14.07.2023
Ct. 654
D/L 27
ab
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURIDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
FMAT (MV) 108 of 2022
Chitra Mandal @ Mondal & Ors.
-Vs-
M/s. Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd & Anr.
Mr. Jayanta Kumar Mondal,
Ms. Sima Ghosh,
Mr. S. Rakshit
... for the appellants-claimants
Mr. Rajesh Singh
... for the respondent No. 1 -insurance company
This appeal is preferred against the judgment and
award dated 21st January, 2022 passed by the learned
Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, 1st Court, Suri,
Birbhum in MAC Case No. 112 of 2016 granting
compensation of Rs. 12,12,400/- in default the
compensation amount shall carry interest @ 6% from
the date of judgment till payment in favour of the
claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988.
As per the report of the Additional Stamp
Reporter dated 16.03.2022, the appeal is preferred
within the statutory period of limitation.
Accordingly, the appeal is formally admitted and
registered.
With the consent of the parties, calling for of
lower court records and preparation of informal paper
books are dispensed with.
Since the respondent no. 2, owner of the
offending vehicle did not contest the claim application
and the case was disposed of ex parte against him,
hence service of notice of appeal upon the said
respondent stands dispensed with.
The brief fact of the case is that on 12.02.2016, at
about 1.30 p.m. while the victim was standing near Suri
bus stand on Ahamedpur Bolpur Kopai Road at that
time the offending vehicle bearing registration no. WB-
57/9990 (tractor) coming from Ahamedpur side and
proceeding towards Kopai Bolpur, dashed the victim, as
a result of which he sustained injuries and was shifted
to Sainthia Hospital where he was declared brought
dead by the attending doctor. On account of sudden
demise of the victim, the claimants being the widow,
minor daughter and the parents of the deceased filed
application for compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/- under
Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
The appellants-claimants in order to establish
their case examined four witnesses and produced
documents, which have been marked as Exhibits 1 to
10 respectively.
The respondent no. 1-insurance company did not
adduce any evidence.
Upon considering the materials on record and the
evidence adduced on behalf of the claimants, the
learned Tribunal granted compensation of
Rs.12,12,400/-, in default the compensation amount
shall carry interest @ 6% from the date of judgment till
payment in favour of the claimants under Section 166
of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the
impugned judgment and award, the claimants have
preferred the present appeal.
Mr. Jayanta Kumar Mondal, learned advocate for
the appellants-claimants submits that the learned
Tribunal erred in granting interest on the compensation
amount from the date of judgment on the event of
default of insurance company to satisfy the award
within one month of passing of the judgment whereas it
ought to have granted interest on the compensation
amount from the date of filing of the claim application
till payment. He further submits that the learned
Tribunal was of the view that the claimants have taken
adjournments one after the other which has resulted in
delay in disposal of the claim application, which is
erroneous since the order sheet of the learned Tribunal
speaks otherwise. In the light of his aforesaid
submissions, he prays that interest on the
compensation amount should be from the date of filing
of the claim application till payment instead from the
date of judgment on default. He files certified copy of
the order sheets of the learned Tribunal, which is taken
on record.
Mr. Rajesh Singh, learned advocate for the
respondent no. 1-insurance company opposing such
prayer submits that there were laches on the part of the
claimants, which has resulted in delay in disposal of the
claim application and accordingly, the order of the
learned Tribunal granting interest on the compensation
amount from the date of judgment in default to satisfy
award within the stipulated period by the insurance
company should be affirmed.
Having heard the learned advocates for the
respective parties, the only issue that has fallen for
consideration is whether the interest on the
compensation amount should be from the date of filing
of the claim application till payment.
The learned tribunal upon considering the dates
of examination of witnesses by the claimants has
allowed interest on the compensation amount from the
date of judgment in the event of default in satisfying the
award by insurance company within the stipulated
period.
From the certified copy of the order sheets of the
learned Tribunal, a tabular statement of dates is
reproduced hereunder for convenience of discussion:
Date Purpose Next date
01.03.2017 Issues 31.05.2017 for
framed peremptory hearing.
31.05.2017 Peremptory 11.07.2017 for
hearing peremptory hearing
upon petition for taking
off the case from
peremptory hearing
board filed by
insurance company.
11.07.2017 Peremptory 03.11.2017 for
hearing peremptory hearing
since no steps taken by
either of the parties.
03.11.2017 Peremptory 16.02.2018 for
hearing peremptory hearing.
Presiding Officer on
leave.
16.02.2018 Peremptory 01.06.2018 for
hearing peremptory hearing.
Claimants took
adjournment.
01.06.2018 Peremptory 07.08.2018 for
hearing peremptory hearing
since regular Presiding
Officer on leave.
07.08.2018 Peremptory 13.11.2018 for
hearing peremptory hearing
since there was
resolution of the Bar.
13.11.2018 Peremptory 21.01.2019 for
hearing peremptory hearing
since neither of the
parties took steps.
21.01.2019 Peremptory Claimants examined
hearing witness and produced
documents. 05.03.2019
fixed for further
hearing.
05.03.2019 Further Claimants filed
evidence examination-in-chief of
P.W.2. The same was
kept on record since
regular Presiding
Officer was on leave.
25.04.2019 was fixed
for further hearing.
25.04.2019 Further 27.06.2019 for further
evidence evidence due to cease
work by local Bar as
per resolution.
27.06.2019 Further P.W.2 examined in full
evidence and discharged.
11.09.2019 for further
evidence.
11.09.2019 Further 06.12.2019 for further
evidence evidence since regular
Presiding Officer was
transferred.
06.12.2019 Further Regular Presiding
evidence Officer on leave.
14.02.2020 for further
evidence.
14.02.2020 Further Claimants prayed for
evidence time. 03.04.2020 fixed
for further evidence.
11.06.2020 Record put 02.09.2020 was fixed
up due to for further evidence.
lockdown
for Covid
Pandemic
02.09.2020 Further No witness examined.
evidence 19.11.2020 fixed for
further evidence.
19.11.2020 Further Claimants prayed for
evidence time. 12.01.2021 fixed
for further evidence.
12.01.2021 Further Claimants examined
evidence P.W.3. in full and
produced documents.
26.02.2021 for further
evidence.
26.02.2021 Further Claimants examined
evidence P.W.4 in full and
produced documents.
Evidence of claimants
was closed.
From the above list of dates though it is found
that on few occasions the claimants sought
adjournments but the delay cannot be put wholly on
the shoulders of the claimants that due to their laches
there has been delay. For the reasons of the resolutions
of the local Bar, absence of regular Presiding Officer
and also prevalence Covid pandemic, there was also
delay. Such being the position, the impugned order
relating to grant of interest on the compensation
amount as a default clause requires to be modified.
Thus, the claimants are entitled to interest on the
compensation amount @ 6% per annum from the date
of filing of the claim application till the date of payment.
It is informed that the claimants have already received
the awarded sum in terms of the order of the learned
Tribunal.
Accordingly, the respondent no. 1-insurance
company is directed to deposit the amount towards
interest on the compensation awarded @ 6% per annum
from the date of filing of the claim application till
payment by way of cheque before the learned Registrar
General, High Court, calcutta within a period of six
week from date.
Upon deposit of the aforesaid amount towards
interest, the learned Registrar General, High Court,
Calcutta, shall release the same in favour of the
claimants in equal share upon satisfaction of their
identity.
The appellant no. 1 being the mother and natural
guardian of the appellant no. 2 shall receive the share
of the minor on her behalf and shall keep the same is a
Fixed Deposit Scheme of any Nationalized Bank or Post
Office till attainment of majority by the said minor.
With the aforesaid observations, the appeal
stands disposed of. The impugned judgment and award
of the learned Tribunal stands modified to the above
extent. No order as to costs.
All connected applications, if any, stand disposed
of.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Urgent photostat copy of this order, if applied for,
be given to the parties upon compliance of necessary
legal formalities.
( Bivas Pattanayak, J.)
