Jharkhand High Court
National Insurance Company Ltd vs Siraj Ansari & Anr on 22 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
[Civil Writ Jurisdiction]
W.P.(C) No. 5841 of 2009
National Insurance Company Ltd. .... .. ... Petitioner
Versus
Siraj Ansari & Anr. .. ... ... Respondents
...........
CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
(Through :-Video Conferencing)
.........
For the Petitioner : Mr. G.C. Jha, Advocate
For the Respondent No.1 : Mr. Sarvendra Kumar, Advocate
......
08/ 22.09.2021.
Heard, learned counsel for the parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioner- Insurance Company has submitted that
pre-litigation Case No.38 of 2007 has been decided before Permanent Lok
Adalat, Dhanbad on the consent of the parties. The Permanent Lok Adalat,
Dhanbad has awarded a sum of Rs.2,15,000/- to the claimant. It has also been
ordered that the Insurance Company shall be at liberty to realize the same from
owner of the offending vehicle.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that owner has not
appeared before the learned Tribunal, as such, such right has been granted to the
petitioner-Insurance Company.
Learned counsel, Mr. Sarvendra Kumar has appeared in this case on behalf
of the respondent/claimant and submitted that the Permanent Lok Adalat has
rightly passed the impugned Award, in view of the judgment passed by the Apex
Court in the case of Bar Council of India vs. Union of India, reported in 2012
(8) SCC 243 and has referred para 27, which reads as follows:-
"27. Can the power conferred on Permanent Lok Adalats to adjudicate the disputes
between the parties concerning public utility service up to a specific pecuniary limit, if
they do not relate to any offence, as provided under Section 22-C(8), be said to be
unconstitutional and irrational? We think not. It is settled law that an authority
empowered to adjudicate the disputes between the parties and act as a tribunal may not
necessarily have all the trappings of the court. What is essential is that it must be a
creature of statute and should adjudicate the dispute between the parties before it after
giving reasonable opportunity to them consistent with the principles of fair play and
natural justice. It is not a constitutional right of any person to have the dispute
adjudicated by means of a court only. Chapter VI-A has been enacted to provide for an
institutional mechanism, through the establishment of Permanent Lok Adalats for
settlement of disputes concerning public utility service before the matter is brought to
the court and in the event of failure to reach any settlement, empowering the Permanent
Lok Adalat to adjudicate such dispute if it does not relate to any offence."
As such, he has submitted that the adjudication made with consent of the
parties before the permanent Lok Adalat is binding upon the parties for an
accident which took place on 25.05.2006 and the impugned Award has not been
honoured till date though the Permanent Lok Adalat has passed an award on
11.02.2009, as such, the writ petition may be dismissed.
After hearing, learned counsel for the parties and on the basis of perusal of
the materials and in view of the judgment relied upon by learned counsel for the
respondent/ claimant, it appears that no illegality or infirmity has been found in
the aforesaid judgment.
Accordingly, the instant writ petition is hereby dismissed with aforesaid
right given to the Insurance Company to realize the compensation amount from
the owner of the offending vehicle.
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
R.S.
