ORIENTAL INSUARCE CO LTD vs RAM DEVI & ORS ( UNITED INDIA INSUARANCE COMPANY LTD)
$~15
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 19th February, 2024
+ MAC.APP. 1042/2017
ORIENTAL INSUARCE CO LTD ….. Appellant
Through: Mr. A.K. Soni, Adv.
versus
RAM DEVI & ORS ( UNITED INDIA INSUARANCE
COMPANY LTD) ….. Respondents
Through: Mr. Sankar N. Sinha, Adv. for
R-8.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA
DHARMESH SHARMA, J. (ORAL)
CM APPL. 50789/2023 (delay of 281 days)
1. This is an application seeking condonation of 281 days delay in
filing the present petition.
2. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.
Delay of 281days in filing the present petition is condoned.
3. The application stands disposed of.
CM APPL.50788/2023
4. This is an application moved on behalf of the
appellant/Insurance Company seeking setting aside of order dated
29.08.2022, whereby the appeal was dismissed for non-appearance of
any AR or for that matter counsel for the Insurance Company,
although the said application is opposed by learned counsel for the
respondents present, however for the reason stated in the application
and in the interest of justice, the same is allowed. The application
stands disposed of accordingly.
MAC.APP. 1042/2017
5. Having heard the submissions advanced by the learned counsel
for the parties present and perusal of the record, the only issue that has
been raised by the learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance
Company is that there was a delay of 18 years on the part of the
respondent Nos. 1 to 3/claimants in filing the claim petition under
Section 140 read with Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
and yet the learned Presiding Officer MACT, North West District,
Rohini Courts Complex, Delhi has awarded interest to the claimants at
the rate of 9% w.e.f. the date of filing of the petition i.e. 22.04.2008.
6. Evidently, the motor accident question had occurred on
02.08.1989 resulting in fatal injuries to Naresh Gupta. It is also indeed
borne out from the record that the claim petition was filed after almost
18 years on 22.04.2008. It appears that although the claimants had
filed a claim petition on the same facts before the MACT, Ahmedabad
State of Gujarat, which was dismissed in default.
7. However, a specific issue was framed whether the claim
petition was not maintainable on that account and the learned Tribunal
vide impugned judgment-cum-award dated 14.09.2017 referred to
previous order dated 21.11.2012, whereby the then Presiding Officer
MACT had decided the issue of maintainable of the petition in favour
of the claimants observing that the provisions of the Motor Vehicles
Act are benevolent in nature and the aim of the entitlement is to
provide relief to the unfortunate road victims and their legal
representatives.
8. It was further observed that the beneficial provisions of the Act,
should not be allowed to be defeated by having recourse to technical
provisions of Civil Procedure Code, if the claimants are otherwise
entitled to the relief prayed for own merits.
9. First things first, the aforesaid order dated 21.11.2012 was not
challenged by the appellant/Insurance Company, and therefore, it
attains finality and at this stage of the matter, it is not open to the
appellant/Insurance Company now to re-agitate the said issue and
raise a plea that the petition was barred by limitation.
10. All said and done, in view of the inordinate delay on the part of
the claimants in filing the claim petition, the award of interest @ 9%
is very onerous and harsh. In the opinion of this Court, not creating a
binding precedent, interest of justice would be served if the rate of
interest is reduced, to which in all fairness a concession is afforded by
learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3/claimants.
11. Accordingly, the present appeal is disposed of directing that
respondent Nos. 1 to 3/claimants shall be entitled to interest on the
amount of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal @ 7.5% per
annum from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e. 22.04.2008 till
realization.
12. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
DHARMESH SHARMA, J.
FEBRUARY 19, 2024/sa