M/S. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. v. SANJHA DEVI

Delhi High Court · 10 Aug 2017 · 2017:DHC:4395
R.K. Gauba
MAC Appeal No.487/2009
2017:DHC:4395
motor_accident_claims appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurer's appeal challenging compensation awarded under the Motor Vehicles Act, holding that a plea of limited liability not raised before the Tribunal cannot be entertained on appeal without evidence.

Full Text
Translation output
MAC Appeal No.487/2009 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 10th August, 2017
MAC.APP. 487/2009 and CM 6169/2010
M/S. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Advocate
VERSUS
SANJHA DEVI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: None
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT
(ORAL)

1. The claim petition (MACT 421/2008) filed by the first to fourth respondents herein (collectively, the claimants) on 26.04.2004 had initially sought compensation on the principle of fault liability under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. However, mid-way the proceedings on the application of the claimants, it was converted into a claim petition for compensation under structured formula on the principle of no fault liability under Section 163A of the M.V. Act. By the impugned judgment dated 02.07.2009, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal), awarded compensation directing the insurance company to pay.

2. The appeal by the insurer is pressed on the ground that the insurance policy was an ‘Act only policy’ and, therefore, its liability was limited. Concededly, this plea was not urged before the tribunal 2017:DHC:4395 MAC Appeal No.487/2009 nor any issue pressed to such effect for adjudication. During the pendency of this appeal, on application of the insurer (CM 14104/2009), by order dated 25.11.2009, opportunity was given to lead additional evidence. Inspite of a number of adjournments granted, no evidence was led and consequently, the said opportunity stood exhausted in terms of order dated 08.04.2010.

3. In the above facts and circumstances, the appeal is found devoid of substance and is dismissed.

4. By order dated 08.10.2009, the appellant had been directed to deposit the entire awarded amount with interest with UCO Bank, Delhi High Court branch. By order dated 25.11.2009, directions were given for release of the said amount. The amounts thus deposited and released shall be treated as amounts paid in discharge of the liability under the impugned judgment to be dealt with in terms of the directions of the tribunal in the impugned judgment. If there is any deficiency, the claimants are at liberty to move the tribunal by taking out appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.

5. The statutory amount shall be refunded.

6. The appeal and the pending application are disposed of in above terms. R.K.GAUBA, J. AUGUST 10, 2017 yg