National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Asha Bhandari & Ors.
2016 Latest Caselaw 1512 Del

$~11
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                   Date of Decision: 25th February, 2016
+     MAC.APP. 1255/2012

      NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
                                                                   ..... Appellant
                          Through       Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv.

                          versus

      ASHA BHANDARI & ORS.
                                                             ..... Respondent
                          Through       Ms. Vrinda Agarwal, Adv.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
                          JUDGMENT

R.K.GAUBA, J (ORAL):

1. The insurance company is aggrieved with the judgment dated 04.09.2012 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal) on the basis of detailed accident report (DAR) submitted by the station house officer of police station Lodhi Colony with reference to first information report (FIR) No.62/2012 regarding motor vehicular accident that had occurred at about 6 PM on 28.05.2012 resulting in death of Maan Singh Bhandari involving SX4 car bearing No.DL 9C QS 4800 (the offending vehicle), concededly insured with it (the appellant) against third party risk for the period in question. The DAR had been submitted by the investigating police in terms of Section 160 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MV Act) read with directions of a learned

Single Judge of this Court in Rajesh Tyagi v. Jaibir Singh & Ors. (FAO No.842/2003 decided on 08.06.2009.

2. The basic contention of the insurance company is that pursuant to the agreed procedure promulgated under the directions of the learned Single Judge in the matter aforesaid, on service of notice on the DAR it had submitted a legal offer to pay compensation in the sum of `21,07,276/- to settle the claim. It is pointed out that the Tribunal, without holding inquiry, proceeded to award compensation to the tune of `41,16,300/-.

3. By order dated 14.12.2012, whilst entertaining the appeal at hand and issuing notice thereupon, the execution of the award was stayed. By order dated 03.01.2013, the directions were partially modified and the insurance company was called upon to deposit the amount in terms of legal offer with up-to-date interest accrued thereon with UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch, New Delhi within the period specified whereupon the said amount was directed to be held in fixed deposit receipt in the name of the first respondent herein (the widow)/first claimant with no right to its release. Subsequently, the matter has been adjourned from time to time with either side taking adjournments. The claimants, particularly, have been disinterested to the extent that either they would not appear or would seek adjournment. Today, again a proxy counsel on behalf of claimants has appeared only to seek adjournment. Given the narrow area of controversy, the above state of background facts and the time already granted, there is no reason to adjourn the matter yet again.

4. Since the record of the Tribunal makes it abundantly clear that the Tribunal did not hold any inquiry in accordance with law on the claim for compensation, albeit arising out of DAR, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained. A similar view was taken by this Court in identical fact situation by judgment dated 12.02.2016 in Shriram General Insurance Co Ltd. v. Saleem & Ors. (MAC.APP.No.539/2011). Thus, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment is set aside.

5. The amount deposited by the insurance company in terms of afore quoted earlier directions shall be arranged to be transferred by the Registrar General to the Tribunal which shall keep it in a nationalized bank in interest bearing account in the name of the first claimant with liberty given to her to draw monthly interest. The Tribunal is directed to hold a proper inquiry in accordance with law and thereafter pass a fresh judgment on the claim case. Needless to add, the amount earlier deposited by the insurance company shall be liable to be suitably adjusted against the award that is eventually passed.

6. The parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal for further proceedings on 11.03.2016.

7. The Tribunal's record shall be returned forthwith.

8. The statutory deposit, if made, shall be refunded.

9. The appeal is disposed of in above terms.

R.K. GAUBA (JUDGE) FEBRUARY 25, 2016/VLD