- (1.) The petitioning insurance company (hereafter the insurer) by presenting this writ petition calls in question an order dated April 27, 2013 passed by the Lok Adalat, Nadia (hereafter the Lok Adalat). The said order allowed an application under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereafter the said application), registered as Motor Accident Claims Case No. 333 of 2011, on compromise. The claimants were awarded a compensation of Rs. 26,50,000/- to be paid within a month from the date of the order and in such case the awarded compensation would not earn any interest; however, in default of such payment, the awarded compensation would carry interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of filing of the said application till full realization. The claimants in the said application were the minor son, the husband, the mother and the father of the victim Nila Roy, a school teacher. She was on her way to school traveling in a bus. Owing to alleged rash and negligent driving of the bus, the same overturned resulting in the instant death of the victim. The claimants having filed the said application before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nadia at Krishnanagar (hereafter the tribunal), the same was transferred to the Lok Adalat. The order impugned came to be made thereafter.
(2.) The claimants, on the failure of the insurer to effect payment in terms of the order of the Lok Adalat, instituted proceedings for execution before the tribunal giving rise to Money Execution Case No. 3 of 2014. The insurer filed a written objection to the application for execution. It was the claim of the insurer that the order was received by it through its learned lawyer on May 14, 2013. Although the insurer was obliged to make payment within May 26, 2013, it had defaulted and ultimately the payment was effected on June 7, 2013, resulting in a delay of only 11 days in effecting payment in terms of the order of the Lok Adalat. According to the insurer, the order awarding interest was passed by the Lok Adalat without jurisdiction. An order dated February 20, 2014 was passed by the tribunal recording that the written objection filed by the insurer is misconceived, since it is beyond its jurisdiction to travel behind the award, and that the petition for attachment would be considered on the next date i.e. March 23, 2014, if payment were not effected in the meanwhile. The execution case is pending.
(3.) It is after such order of the tribunal that the insurer has approached this Court with the instant writ petition dated March 21, 2014.;