MARUTI KRISHANJI CHAVAN Vs. HARISH CHANDRA SATARKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision application is directed against the order, dated 28th January, 1991, whereby the prayer made by the petitioner to exclude the compensation of Rs. 7,500/ - paid under Section 92 -A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, which is now corresponding to Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, under 'no fault liability' from the final award made in favour of the petitioner in the sum of Rs. 40,000/ - is rejected.

(2.) THE controversy arises in the following manner. Petitioner instituted a claim petition that he was the victim of an accident on 24th April, 1985, when he was travelling in a bus bearing No. GUX 164 owned by the Kadamba Transport Corporation. It is common ground that this bus collided with truck bearing No. GDZ 5140 driven by the first respondent, owned by the second respondent and insured with the third respondent in this petition. The petitioner had made a claim for compensation in the amount of Rs. 50,000/ -against not only the present respondents, but also against the Kadamba Transport Corporation, the driver and the insurance company, viz., National Insurance Co. Ltd. By the award dated 1st December, 1988, the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 40,000/ - together with interest at 12 per cent per annum but, how - ever, directed that the same shall be paid jointly and severally by the present respondents, exonerating the Kadamba Transport Corporation, the driver and the National Insurance Co. Ltd. The award was silent insofar as the earlier award which had been made under Section 92 -A for 'no fault liability' was concerned. It is equally common ground that the 'no fault liability' award when made in favour of the petitioner directed all the six opposite parties jointly and severally to pay the sum of Rs. 7,500/ -. It is common ground that the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and National Insurance Co. Ltd. paid a sum of Rs. 3,750/ - each and which the petitioner admittedly received during the pendency of the proceedings.

(3.) THE learned Tribunal rejected this prayer of the petitioner and held that whatever amount paid under 'no fault liability' is liable to be adjusted against the amount awarded in the final award and, therefore, the petitioner has no escape but to have the sum of Rs. 7,500/ - deducted from the final award of Rs. 40,000/ -.