JUDGEMENT
P.P. Bhatt, J. -
(1.) IT appears that by order dated 8.1.2014, an explanation was called for from the concerned Principal District Judge, Gumla. In pursuance to the said order, the explanation was given by the concerned Principal District Judge, Gumla vide letter No. 219/14 dated 27th January, 2014.
The explanation given by the learned Principal District Judge is not in consonance with the proposition of law. The concerned Judicial Officer be informed to be more careful in future.
I.A. No. 6098 of 2014
The present interlocutory application has been preferred by the learned counsel appearing in the learned court below on behalf of the claimant under Order 1, Rule 10 r/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking intervention in the instant appeal.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the application, which is supported by an affidavit.
For the reasons stated in this application and in view of the prayer made in paragraph 7 of this application, the direction given by the learned Principal District Judge, Gumla in paras 10 and 11 is hereby ordered to be modified to the extent that the entire amount be paid to the claimant. With aforesaid direction, the I.A. stands disposed of.
M.A. No. 104 of 2012
This appeal has been filed under section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 by the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. against the Judgment and Award dated 19/03/2012 passed by the Principle District Judge cum Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Tribunal, Gumla in M.A.C. case No. 13 of 2010. Whereby the learned Tribunal passed Judgment and Order directing the insurer of the vehicle to make the payment of Rs. 2,13,270/ - to the advocate of the claimant.
The brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under: - -
the deceased Teresa Ekka was standing on the bus stop, a truck bearing No. JH 02J -6349 dashed her and flew away. The injured Teresa Ekka was taken to hospital and was referred to RIMS, Ranchi for better treatment. But she died on 04/12/2008. The tribunal assessed a sum of Rs. 10,16,352/ - payable as compensation to the claimant and amount of Rs. 2,13,270/ - as lawyer's fee to be paid separately by the insurer of the vehicle.
(2.) THE insurer co. has preferred this appeal mainly for setting aside the direction issued by the learned Tribunal for payment of Rs. 2,13,270/ - as lawyer's fee by way of separate cheque in the name of counsel appearing for the claimant. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the Tribunal has no power to issue such direction. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Tribunal has no jurisdiction to enforce any private agreement between claimant and counsel for payment of professional fee and as such the judgment on the issue of payment of lawyer's fee on the basis of agreement cannot be enforced while deciding Claim petition u/S. 166 of the M.V. Act, 1988. Learned counsel further submits that the claims Tribunal u/S. 164 of M.V. Act has been vested with a power to adjudicate the just and reasonable compensation to be paid to the claimant on account of death of victims or injury arising out of use of motor vehicle and it is grave illegality to paid lawyer's fee separately with the amount of compensation Award. It is also submitted that Rule 426 of Civil Court Rules provides for the payment of fees to an advocate and the pleaders. The amount of lawyer's fee in any view of the manner cannot exceed in accordance with the Civil Courts Rules.
(3.) HAVING regard to the above submission this court is of the view that the learned court below has committed grave illegality in coming to the finding that a sum of Rs. 2,13,720/ - as a lawyer fee to be paid separately with the amount of compensation award, on the basis of some agreement between the lawyer and claimant. The tribunal has no power to issue such direction. The tribunal/courts shall exercise its power in accordance with law by confining themselves with the prayer and relief claimed in the petition. Thus the order portion to make payment to the learned counsel to a tune of Rs. 2,13,720/ - is hereby set aside.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.