High CourtsDivision Bench(2007) 07 JH CK 0038

Bihar (Now Jharkhand) State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. and Another vs Aiysa Bibi and Others

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 4 July 2007 · Citation: (2007) 2 BLJR 2914 : (2007) 4 JCR 64

HON’BLE JUDGES
M.Y. Eqbal, J · Dabbiru Ganeshrao Patnaik, J
CASE NUMBER
M.A. No. 250 of 2006

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

16 paragraphs · 712 words
1.

Heard the counsel for the appellants.

2.

Reference may be made to the order dated 18.4.2007 which reads as under:

The only grievance of the appellants is that by awarding compensation u/s 166 of the M.V. Act, the amount paid by way of interim compensation u/s 140 of the Act, has not been deducted although the said interim compensation was received by the claimant-respondent.

Issued notice to respondent No. 1 in the admission matter for which requisites etc. under registered cover with A/D must be filed within one week.

3.

Pursuant to the aforesaid order respondent No. 1 although appeared through vakalatnama but no one appears on her behalf.

4.

As noticed above the only point that falls for consideration is as to whether the amount paid to the respondent-claimants by way of interim compensation, is liable to be deducted from the total compensation awarded by the tribunal in the main application u/s 166 of the Act. In this regard Section 141 of the Act is worth to be quoted hereinbelow:

141.

Provisions as to other right to claim compensation for death or permanent disablement. - (1) The right to claim compensation u/s 140 in respect of death or permanent disablement of any person shall be in addition to (except the right to claim under the scheme referred to Section 163A such other right there after in this section referred to as the right on the principle of fault) to claim compensation in respect thereof under any other provision of this Act or of any other law for the time being in force.

(2) A claim for compensation u/s 140, in respect of death or permanent disablement of any person shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible and where compensation is claimed in respect of such death or permanent disablement u/s 140 and also in pursuance of any right on the principle of fault the claim for compensation u/s 140 shall be disposed of as aforesaid in the first place.

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (1), where in respect of the death or permanent disablement of any person, the person liable to pay compensation u/s 140 is also liable to pay compensation in accordance with the right on the principle of fault, the person so liable shall pay the first mentioned compensation and-

(a) if the amount of the first mentioned compensation is less than the amount of the second mentioned compensation, he shall be liable to pay (in addition to the first mentioned compensation) only so much of the second mentioned compensation as is equal to the amount by which it exceeds the first mentioned compensation.

(b) If the amount of the first mentioned compensation is equal to or more than the amount of the second mentioned compensation, he shall not be liable to pay the second mentioned compensation.

5.

From bare perusal of the aforesaid provision it is manifestly clear that if the compensation amount awarded in the main application is in excess of the interim compensation awarded u/s 140 of the Act, then that amount shall be deducted from the total compensation. The tribunal in the judgment, has proceeded on the basis that the interim compensation was not paid to the claimant and, therefore, the said amount is not to be deduced from the total compensation.

6.

Mr. A.K. Mehta, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that interim compensation of Rs. 50,000/- has already been paid to the claimants-respondents.

7.

In order to ascertain the correctness of the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel, notice was issued to the claimant-respondent No. 1 but no one appears to deny the submission made by the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant.

8.

In such circumstances we hold that the interim compensation amount has already been paid to the claimant. If that is so, the impugned award is modified only to the extent that the interim compensation amount already paid to the claimant shall be deducted from total amount of compensation awarded by the tribunal in the impugned award. Needless to say that the appellant shall forthwith pay the compensation amount as indicated above, to the claimant preferably within a period of six weeks from today.

9.

With the above observation this appeal stands disposed of.