JUDGMENT :

1. The appellant – United India Insurance Company Limited (original opponent No. 3) has preferred the present First Appeals, challenging the judgments and awards dated 29.04.2013 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary) and 4th Additional District Judge, Camp at Chhotaudepur (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in M.A.C.P. Nos. 2472, 2473, 2474, and 2476 of 1997 (herein after referred to as “the claim petitions”), respectively, whereby the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the said claim petitions. For ready perusal, the order passed in M.A.C.P. No. 2472 of 1997 is reproduced herein below:

“I. The above referred claim petition is hereby partly allowed. The claimant is entitled to recover Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lac Eighty Fourt Thousand Only) (sic.) with the proportionate cost and with interest at the rate of 9% per annum, from the date of the claim petitions till realization from the opponents, who are liable to pay the same.

II. The opponents are hereby directed to deposit awarded amount within 30 days of the order.

III. Deficit court fees stamp, if any, be recovered from the awarded amount and interim amount if paid be adjusted.

IV. On depositing the amount in the Registry of this Tribunal, Registry is directed to first deduct the amount of deficit court fees, if any.

V. Out of the awarded amount, 70% amount be invested as fixed deposit in any nationalized bank for initial period five years. The remaining 30% amount be paid to the applicants by account payee cheque/s forthwith.

VI. The applicant will not be entitled to get any loan, advance or withdrawal or can create any encumbrance on the aforesaid fixed deposit without prior permission of this Tribunal. However, periodical interest accrued from time to time on the said fixed deposit be paid in cash to applicants.

VII. In view of the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, in the case of Smt. Hansaguti P. Lodhani v/s The Oriental insurance company Ltd., reported in 2007(2) GLH 291, total amount of interest, accrued on the principal amount of compensation is to be apportioned on financial year to claimant for any financial year exceeds Rs.50,000/-, insurance company / owner is / are entitled to deduct appropriate amount under the head of ‘Tax Deducted at Source’ as provided u/s 194(3) (ix) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and if the amount of interest does not exceeds Rs. 50,000/- in any financial year, registry of this Tribunal is directed to allow the claimant to withdraw the amount (as directed in para No.II) without producing the certificate from the concerned Income Tax Authority.

VIII. Award be drawn accordingly in the above petition.”

1.1 In other three claim petitions, the learned Tribunal is pleased to award compensation in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/-, Rs.41,000/- and Rs.10,000/- respectively.

2. Since the facts of the incident are not in dispute, the Court deems it proper not to narrate the same in detail. Least is to state that in an accident which occurred on 09.09.1997, wife namely Veenaben and Son namely Sureshbhai of the original claimant – Bhalubhai Chimanbhai Rathva sustained severe injuries and ultimately, succumbed to the injuries, whereas, others sustained injuries.

3. Heard Mr. R. G. Dwivedi, learned advocate for the appellant – insurance company. Though served, none has put in appearance for the respondents.

4. The learned advocate for the appellant - original opponent No. 3 – insurance company has submitted that the impugned judgments and awards passed by the learned Tribunal are illegal, perverse, unjust and unreasonable, because the same are contrary to the settled principles and proposition of law, and are diametrical to the evidence on record. It is submitted that the learned Tribunal has miserably erred in drawing highly unjustified and unwarranted inferences from the evidence on record. There is a material irregularity and illegality committed by the learned Tribunal in passing the impugned judgmen