Krishna S.Dixit, J. - (1.) This appeal by the insurer is directed against the judgment and award dated 23.02.2010 made by the M.A.C.T. D.K. Mangalore allowing the claimant's M.V.C.No.1399/2006, whereby a compensation of Rs.3,88,500/- has been awarded with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are that: a) In a vehicular accident that happened on 08.07.2006, one Joseph Mascarenhas, aged 34 years sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to the same. The legal heir of the deceased had claimed compensation by presenting M.V.C.No.1399/2006 u/s. 163A of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 which was resisted by the appellant- Insurance Company by filing the Written Statement. b) To prove the claim, the claimant examined herself as PW-1 and in her evidence 7 documents came to be marked as Ex.P-1 to P-7 which included the police papers as well. From the side of the appellant, none was examined, although a copy of the ration card and a copy of the insurance policy were marked as Ex. R-1 and R-2. The M.A.C.T. after considering the pleadings of the parties and after weighing the evidentiary material, has entered the impugned judgment and award.
(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant Shri Krishna Swamy, firstly, contends that the 'Doctrine of Res Judicata' applies to various stages of very same litigation and therefore the order dated 03.09.2009 mentioned above, whether we call it interlocutory or otherwise, would attract the doctrine more particularly when it has attained finality, there being no further challenge thereto. In support of his contention he banks upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Y.B.PATIL vs. Y.L.PATIL, 1976 4 SCC 66.;