Back
2018 Supreme(Chh) 188
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, SHARAD KUMAR GUPTA, JJ.
Rajendra Kumar Agrawal S/o Satyanarayan Agrawal - Petitioner
Versus
The New India Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. - Respondents
REVP No. 119 of 2017
Decided On : 08-01-2018
For the Petitioner:Dr. Shiv Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate
An owner who did not challenge the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal cannot seek relief against the quantum of compensation in a review petition.
Headnote:
Review Petition - Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - The court held that the owner of the vehicle, who did not challenge the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, cannot seek relief against the quantum of compensation in a review petition, despite the High Court leaving open the question of quantum of compensation in the insurer's appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The owner of the vehicle involved in a motor accident sought a review of the judgment regarding the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the owner, who did not challenge the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, cannot seek relief against the quantum of compensation in a review petition.
Issues: The main issue was whether the owner had the right to seek relief against the quantum of compensation fixed and awarded by the Tribunal in a review petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the owner, who did not challenge the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, cannot seek relief against the quantum of compensation in a review petition, despite the High Court leaving open the question of quantum of compensation in the insurer's appeal.
Final Decision: The review petition was dismissed in limine.
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.
1. This application seeking review of the judgment is by the owner of the vehicle which was involved in the motor accident.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the review petition.
3. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal passed an award under Motor Vehicles Act on 25.11.2006. That award created joint and several liabilities as against the owner, driver and the insurer of the vehicle. The insurer filed an appeal to the High Court. This Court upheld the insurer plea that the driver did not have a valid licence and he had held out a fake document as licence. Thereby, the High Court exonerated the insurer from liability; however, preserving contentions of the owner regarding the quantum of compensation. That verdict does not by itself give an independent cause of action to the owner to challenge the quantum of compensation; without having instituted an appeal against the award of the Tribunal whereby comprehensive compensation was awarded, jointly and severally, including on the owner as well. Therefore, the award which was left unchallenged by the owner has become final as against him.
This being so, notwithstanding, the aforesaid verdict in the appeal filed by the insurer, the review petitioner who had not filed any appeal against the quantum of compensation or the liability fixed on him cannot rake up that issue in the garb of a review petition, merely because the High Court, while deciding the insurer's appeal, had left open the question of quantum of compensation.
4. In the aforesaid view of the matter, we do not find that the petitioner has any right to seek relief against the quantum of compensation fixed and award passed by the Tribunal though this application seeking review of the judgment. This application, therefore, fails.
5. In the result, this review petition is dismissed in limine.
