National Insurance Company vs Dhaniben Naranbhai Patani and Others

Jayant Patel, J.—ADMIT. Mr. Ashutosh R. Bhatt, Learned Counsel appears and wavies admission on behalf of the original claimants.

As in all the appeals common question arises for consideration, they are being considered by this common judgment.

All the appeals are directed against the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal dated 31.08.2005 in the concerned MACPs and further order passed by the Tribunal dated 20.09.2010 in the concerned applications for condonation of delay.

The relevant facts are that five claim petitions were filed in respect of one accident dated 30.09.1987 at Pavagadh Machi, near Budhia Darwaja. It is the case of the Appellant that insurance policy of the vehicle involved was not produced and in spite of the same, the Tribunal has held the insurance company liable for the payment. It is further the case of the Appellant that document Exh.55, which has been referred to is not the policy but is the p.m. note/report of the concerned deceased and having known to the same, the Appellant preferred applications for review but, as there was delay, applications for condonation of delay was also submitted. The Tribunal rejected the applications for condonation fo delay. Under the circumstances, the present appeals have been preferred against the award.

We have heard Mr. Dakshesh Mehta, Learned Counsel for the Appellant and Mr. Ashutosh Bhatt, Learned Counsel for the concerned original claimants, who are the main contesting parties in the present appeals. So far as the other Respondents are concerned, their presence would not be required at this stage.

Learned Counsel for the Respondents-original claimants declares before the Court that if the matters are remanded only on the point of genuineness and existence of the insurance policy of the vehicle involved in the accident, his clients have no objection for such purpose. He submitted that the original claimants are awaiting for the outcome of the matters for long a time and in spite of the award, the amount was not deposited but, subsequently, only after the order passed by this Court the amount has been deposited. He further submitted that considering the said aspect this Court may award reasonable cost and may also permit withdrawal of the amount to the extent as it may be found proper or in the alternative, direction may be issued to the Tribunal to decide the matters on this point within some specified time limit.

As such whether the vehicle concerned, which is found to have been involved in the accident, was insured or not is a crucial aspect of the matters, more particularly when the policy referred to at Exh.55 is, as per the insurance company, not the policy but is the p.m. note/report. We find that no further discussion would be required when the Learned Counsel for the original claimants is agreeable for remand. At the same time appropriate cost deserves to be awarded to the original claimants since it is not on account of their fault, they are faced with the present litigation.

As regards the aspect of withdrawal is concerned, we find that it can wait for some time. In the meantime, the amount already deposit can be ordered to be invested so as to avoid loss of interest.

In view of the aforesaid, the impugned judgments and award of the Tribunal are quashed and set aside with further direction that the matters shall stand restored to the file of the Tribunal and the Tribunal shall examine the aspect of the facts and circumstances and genuineness of the insurance policy of the vehicle involved in the accident and if required the Tribunal shall permit the parties to lead evidence but only on this particular point and thereafter shall pass a fresh award in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to both sides. As the accident is of 1987, the Tribunal shall conclude the aforesaid direction preferably within a period of 06 (six) months from the date of receipt of the order of this Court.

It is further directed that the Appellants shall pay cost of Rs. 5,000/- in each matters to the Respondents-original claimants. As the amount of cost of Rs. 10,000/- has already been deposited as per the order passed by this Court dated 09.08.2011 in Civil Application Nos. 7079/2011 to 7083/2011, out of which amount of Rs. 5,000/- in each matter is already appropriated towards the cost of condonation of delay in each matter, remaining amount of Rs. 5,000/- in each matter shall be permitted to be withdrawn by the original claimants.

It is also directed that the Tribunal shall invest the amount deposited by the Appellant-insurance company, pending the appeals, and such investment shall be made with the nationalized bank for a period of one year and may be renewed if required till the fresh award/s is/are passed. After award is passed by the Tribunal in each of the matter, the Tribunal shall be at liberty to appropriate the amount, unless there is any prohibitory order of any competent forum known to law.

Appeals are allowed to the aforesaid extent.

Registry to place a copy of this order in connected matters.