Hon'ble MAHESHWARI, J. - (1.) IN this appeal by the claimant, only the question regarding pendente lite interest being the matter for consideration, a brief reference to the background facts would suffice.
(2.) ON 25/5/2001, the claimant-appellant Rajiv, while riding his motorcycle with one Suresh Kumar on Balotra-Pachpadra road, sustained grievous injuries on being hit by an oncoming jeep bearing registration No. RJ 19 T 937. The appellant and so also the other injured Suresh Kumar submitted respective applications making claim for compensation against the driver, owner and insurer of the offending jeep. The Tribunal after consolidating trial of the two claim cases pertaining to the same accident and taking evidence proceeded to find that the accident occurred for rash and negligent driving of the jeep driver Sumer Singh. In relation to the present appellant Rajiv, the Tribunal also proceeded to find with reference to the injury report Ex. 5 that he had suffered extensive injuries and from the X-ray report Ex. 19 that there were fractures of both tibia and fibula bones of his right leg; and that the claimant has established that he had been operated upon and despite taking treatment at different places has not been cured; and that the Junior Specialist of Orthopedic department at Government Hospital, Barmer has certified his permanent disablement at 25%. With reference to the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal found the claimant- appellant entitled for compensation for pecuniary and non- pecuniary losses in the sum of Rs. 1,91,000.00. However, on the question of awarding of interest, the Tribunal proceeded to observe that the issues were framed in the case on 12. 09. 2003 and the claimants concluded their evidence on 28. 04. 2005; that ordinarily about 3-1/2-4 months' period was sufficient for the applicants to produce evidence and the claimants were responsible for the delay of 2-1/4 years for leading evidence and, therefore, they were not entitled for interest for this period. The Tribunal observed,- ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]... The Tribunal, therefore, proceeded to allow compensation to the claimant-appellant at Rs. 1,91,000/- and allowed him interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim application, i. e. 15. 09. 2001 barring the said period of 2-1/4 years. While considering this appeal by the claimant for motion- admission, record was sent for; and after perusal of record, this Court found that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in the sum of Rs. 1,91,000/- called for no modification; however, notices for final disposal were issued on 11. 09. 2006 only on the question of denial by the Tribunal of interest on the award amount for a period of over two years while observing,- "Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of opinion that so far the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in the sum of Rs. 1,91,000/- is concerned, the award calls for no interference in appeal and there appears no scope for enhancement. However, so far denial of the interest by the Tribunal on the award amount for a period of over two years is concerned, the same does require consideration, therefore, issue notice for final disposal on this limited point."
(3.) LEARNED counsel Mr. Rajesh Panwar appearing for the appellant and learned counsel Mr. Anil Bachhawat appearing for the respondent-insurer have been heard in relation to limited point involved in this appeal and record of the case has been examined. Having given a thoughtful consideration to the entire matter, this Court is clearly of opinion that the Tribunal has seriously erred in depriving the claimant-appellant of reasonable pendente lite interest. Ordinarily, in a vehicular accident claim case, the claimant is entitled for interest on the award amount from the date of filing of the claim application as envisaged by Section 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act and such component of interest should not be denied unless the claimant could be said to have intentionally delayed the disposal of the claim application. There appears no reason or justification in this case for which the Tribunal has chosen not to award reasonable interest to the claimant for the entire period from the date of filing of claim application until the date of payment. ;