Delhi High Court
Icici Lombard General Insurance ... vs Sh. Suresh Chand K. Bajaj & Ors. on 12 September, 2013
Author: Suresh Kait
$~19
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 12th September, 2013
+ MAC.APP. 899/2012 & CM No. 14235/2012
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
.... Appellant
Through: Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate.
Versus
SH. SURESH CHAND K. BAJAJ & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
MAC.APP. 899/2012
1. By way of the present appeal, the appellant/Insurance Company
is assailing the impugned award dated 07.05.2012, whereby the
learned Tribunal has granted a sum of Rs.1,47,050/- as compensation
in favour of the respondent No.1/injured.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance
Company has argued that the learned Tribunal has wrongly granted
lawyer's fee to the tune of Rs.20,000/-, however, there is no provision
in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
3. Learned counsel further submitted that in the batch of appeals,
titled as ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kanti Devi
& Ors., National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pratap Singh & Ors., and
Future General India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Geeta Devi & Ors.,
decided by this Court vide judgement dated 30.07.2012, it has been
categorically held that lawyers' fees cannot be granted.
4. Keeping in view the dictum of the Coordinate Bench of this
Court, I set aside the impugned award dated 07.05.2012 qua the
lawyer's fee.
5. The second issue argued by the learned counsel for the
appellant/Insurance Company is that the compensation of
Rs.75,000/- granted towards pain and suffering is on higher side.
6. On perusal of the record, I note that the respondent No.1/injured
has suffered fracture of lateral candyle left leg (Tibia), therefore,
keeping in view the injuries received by the respondent No.1/injured
and the dictum of the Supreme Court in the case of Govind Yadav Vs.
The New India Insurance Company Limited, Civil Appeal No.9014
of 2011 decided on 01.11.2011, the learned Tribunal has granted a sum
of Rs.75,000/- towards pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental shock
and temporary loss of amenities etc.
7. Keeping in view the pain and suffering, inconvenience, mental
shock and temporary loss of amenities suffered by the respondent
No.1/injured, I do not find any discrepancy in the order awarding
Rs.75,000/- on account of non-pecuniary heads.
8. In view of the above discussion, the appeal is partly allowed and
stands disposed of.
9. Vide order dated 30.08.2012, this Court directed the
appellant/Insurance Company to deposit 50% of the awarded amount
(less counsel's fee) along with upto date interest with UCO Bank, High
Court of Delhi, New Delhi.
10. The appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
balance 50% of the awarded amount along with upto date interest with
the Registrar General of this Court within a period of five weeks from
today.
11. On deposit, the Registrar General is directed to release the
amount in favour of the respondent No.1/injured in terms of the
impugned award dated 07.05.2012 passed by the learned Tribunal on
taking necessary steps by him.
12. On deposit of balance award amount, the Registry of this Court
is directed to release the statutory deposit, if any, in favour of the
appellant/Insurance Company.
CM No. 14235/2012 (for stay)
With the disposal of the appeal itself, this application has
become infructuous. The same is accordingly disposed of.
SURESH KAIT, J.
SEPTEMBER 12, 2013
Sb/RS
