Rajasthan High Court
O I C Ltd vs Satya Narain Saini ... on 4 October, 2023
Bench: Ashutosh Kumar
[2023:RJ-JP:26687]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1681/2009
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., M. I. Road, Jaipur having
its Regional Office at Anand Bhawan, Sansar Chandra Road,
Jaipur through its Constituted Attorney.
----Appellant-Non-Claimant
Versus
1. Satya Narain Saini S/o Damodar Lal, aged about 35 years,
R/o 22, Infront of Pipa Factory, Arjun Nagar, Jaipur.
2. Jai Dayal Yadav S/o Rampal Yadav, R/o Maruti Kala Colony,
Scheme 4/34, Ajmer Bye Pass, Jaipur (Driver).
(Deleted on 02.09.1999 on the request of claimant).
3. Rampal Prajapat S/o Nathu Ram Prajapat, R/o Near by
Kumharon ki Dhani, Goner Thana, Sanganer, Jaipur (Owner).
----Respondents-Non-Claimants
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Virendra Agarwal
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR
Order
04/10/2023
1. The present appeal has been filed in the year 2009. The
notices were issued to the respondents vide order dated
25.03.2009. As per the office report, necessary registration
charges have not been filed on behalf of the appellant in
compliance of the order dated 02.05.2014 yet.
2. On the request of learned counsel for the appellant, the
appeal is being heard finally at this stage.
3. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant-Insurance
Company under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
against the judgment and award dated 27.02.2007 passed by
Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter referred
[2023:RJ-JP:26687] (2 of 4) [CMA-1681/2009]
to as the 'Tribunal') in MAC Case No.297/2007, whereby the
learned Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition filed by the
respondent No.1-claimant (hereinafter referred to as the
'claimant') and awarded a compensation of Rs.36,000/- in favour
of the claimant.
4. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal
framed the issues and evaluated the evidence on record. After
hearing learned counsel for the parties, decided the claim petition
of the claimant and passed the impugned judgment and award.
Hence, the present appeal.
5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the
material available on record.
6. It transpires from perusal of the impugned judgment dated
27.02.2007 passed by the learned Tribunal that the claimant-
respondent-Satya Narayan Saini suffered 2.70% permanent
disability in the accident. For 2.70% permanent disability the
learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.11,016/-; Rs.2000/- for simple
injuries; Rs.600/- for medicines; Rs.600/- for treatment expenses,
Rs.10,000/- for mental agony and pain; Rs.8,000/- for loss of
income of four months and Rs.4000/- for special diet and thus,
total Rs.36,000/- has been awarded as compensation to the
claimant, which cannot be said to be on higher side.
7. The award passed in the impugned judgment is less than
Rs.50,000/-. The Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of
New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Chetna Bansal &
Ors in SB Civil Misc. Appeal No.03/2000 has held thus :
[2023:RJ-JP:26687] (3 of 4) [CMA-1681/2009]
"4) This Court therefore impress upon the insurance
companies that despite outer limit of Rs.10,000/-
contained in Section 173(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988, they ought to adopt a uniform policy as to
against award of what amount of compensation, they
should not file appeal. At the same time, considering
substantial fall in the value of rupee as compared to
1988 when the present Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was
enacted by the Parliament, there is also a case of
review of the limit of Rs.10,000/- under Section
173(2), if not upto Rs.1,00,000/-, an amount of
Rs.50,000/- should at least be fixed against which
the appeal should be made not maintainable. This is
however a matter of legislative policy. A copy of this
order should therefore be also endorsed to the
Secretary Ministry of Finance, Banking Division for
initiating the process by raising limit of Rs.10,000/-
to Rs.50,000/-.
5) A copy of this order should also be endorsed to the
Headquarters of National Insurance Company Ltd.,
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., United India
Insurance Company Ltd., New India Assurance
Company Ltd., General Insurance Corporation of
India etc.etc., which may either individually or
collectively, in consultation with each other jointly
frame policy as to what should be the limit of the
amount against which appeal should not be filed.
6) This appeal however is dismissed with costs of
Rs.10,000/-, to be deposited by the appellant-New
India Assurance Company Limited with the Rajasthan
Legal Services Authority, Jaipur within a period of
three months."
[2023:RJ-JP:26687] (4 of 4) [CMA-1681/2009]
8. No interference in the impugned judgment and award is thus
warranted as held by this Court in the case of Chetna Bansal
(supra) and the present appeal is, therefore, dismissed
accordingly.
9. Stay application too stands dismissed.
(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J
A. ARORA /-131.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
