No doubt, the appellant has made out a case, since there was liberty given to the appellant/insurance company to recover the excess sum payable to the respondents. However, having regard o the peculiar facts of this case, we are of the view that this is an eminently fit case to invoke our jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India for the reason that the deceased employee died at the age of 32 years and the claimants having not been granted 50% of enhancement in the salary, no amount was given to the minor towards loss of love, care and protection and further that for consortium only an amount of Rs.25,000/- was paid. 8. Hence, having regard to the peculiar facts of this case, we dismiss this appeal, leaving the question of law open.

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.3867 OF 2017
[ARISING FROM SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO.4009 OF 2017]
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
BABY RADHIKA GUPTA AND ANR RESPONDENT(S)
J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.

Leave granted.
2. This is an appeal filed by the appellant/insurance company aggrieved
by the order passed by the High Court declining to interfere with the order
passed in execution by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.
3. The respondents filed an application for compensation before the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delhi. The Tribunal awarded a total
compensation in the sum of Rs.44,50,000/- along with interest @ 9% from the
date of filing of the petition till its realization. The
appellant/insurance company went in appeal before the High Court and the
same was reduced to Rs.5,82,132/-.
4. During the pendency of the appeal before the High Court, the
respondents were permitted to withdraw 80% of the amount deposited in
Tribunal and the remaining 20%, with accrued interest, was withdrawn by the
appellant/insurance company. While disposing of the Appeal No.239 of 2004,
the High Court, in paragraph 25, held as under:-

“25. Vide interim order dated 13.7.2004, appellant insurance was
directed to deposit entire compensation amount in the Tribunal. 80% of the
deposited amount was directed to be released to the respondent/claimants.
It is hereby directed that balance 20% of deposited amount together with
accrued interest thereon be returned to the appellant insurance company.
It is further held that insurance company is held entitled to recover the
excess sum from the respondents which has been released in the favour of
the respondents.”

5. Thereafter, the respondents moved this Court in Civil Appeal No.7736
of 2009, which was disposed of by judgment dated 24.11.2009 enhancing the
total compensation to Rs.15,70,892/-. With the above modification on the
amount, the appeal was disposed of with a direction to the
appellant/insurance company to pay the balance amount to the respondents
within four weeks with interest @ 9% per annum.
6. Finding that the respondents have withdrawn much more than what they
would have been entitled to, going by the order passed by this Court, the
appellant insurance company filed an appeal seeking recovery of the
interest portion on the principal amount drawn in excess of what they have
been actually entitled to.
7. No doubt, the appellant has made out a case, since there was liberty
given to the appellant/insurance company to recover the excess sum payable
to the respondents. However, having regard o the peculiar facts of this
case, we are of the view that this is an eminently fit case to invoke our
jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India for the reason
that the deceased employee died at the age of 32 years and the claimants
having not been granted 50% of enhancement in the salary, no amount was
given to the minor towards loss of love, care and protection and further
that for consortium only an amount of Rs.25,000/- was paid.
8. Hence, having regard to the peculiar facts of this case, we dismiss
this appeal, leaving the question of law open.
9. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
10. There shall be no orders as to costs.

…………………..J.
[KURIAN JOSEPH]

…………………..J.
[R. BANUMATHI]
NEW DELHI;
MARCH 09, 2017.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.