JUDGMENT :

GITA GOPI, J.

1. Advocate Mr. Maulik Shelat for the United India Insurance Company Ltd. submitted that in the cause title of MACP No. 142/2006, the applicant had been shown as insurance company of both the vehicles i.e. car no. GJ-14040 and truck no. GTX 3404. In view of the evidence on record, the present applicant is the insurance company of car no. GJ-14040. United India Insurance Company Ltd. had been made party respondent as insurance company of truck and inadvertently, this fact at the relevant time had not come to the notice. The judgment and award was passed wherein truck no. GTX 3404 was made solely liable and therefore, respondents no. 3, 4 and 5 were made jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.

2. Mr. Shelat submitted that as soon as the claimant came to know about the error, they had moved a review petition before the Tribunal which was numbered as MACP Review Application no. 4/17 praying for substituting respondent no. 5 as New India Assurance Company Limited, Amul Dairy Road, P.K. Chambers, Taluka District Anand referring to policy no. 31/110600/31781/32919 with the validity period from 16.1.1998 to 13.3.1998 in connection with truck no. GTX 3404. The same came to be rejected on 20.1.2020 observing that the Tribunal has not committed any error or mistake in the title of the claim petition and therefore, there was no clerical error or mistake. The learned Tribunal observed that the correction in the judgment and award could be made only as per Section 152 of CPC and not by way of any review application, thus the review application came to be dismissed.

3. Mr. Shelat stated that thereafter, the United India Insurance Company Ltd. moved MACP Review Application no. 2/22 under Order 47 Rule 1 and Section 151 of CPC praying that since there was no insurance policy of the truck with respondent no. 5 to exonerate respondent no. 5 - United India Insurance Company Ltd. and in place to add New India Assurance Company Limited as party respondent no. 5.

4. Mr. Shelat submitted that the MACP Review Application no. 2/22 was dismissed since MACP Review Application no. 4/17 came to be dismissed. Advocate Mr. Shelat stated that MACMA No. 674/20 had been filed with a prayer to join the party, and the said application had been rejected observing in Paragraph 5 as under:

“The present New India Assurance Company Limited was not joined as a necessary party, the claim was already decided before more than 3 years and one review petition was also filed which was rejected. The present applicant wants to file this application was also in delay, hence the delay application was pending for hearing and in this present delay application, present applicant has prayed for joining the New India Assurance Company Limited as a party of that proceeding but considering the facts and circumstances and objection of the other side, the proposed party is not a necessary party, no adjudication is pending when the matter is already decided by the Tribunal on merits.”

5. As per record the claimant had already brought this fact to the notice of the Tribunal by moving MACP Review Application no. 4/17. The error in the cause title may have been caused since the insurance company of the car is United India Insurance Company Ltd. It appears that the policy of the truck was not produced on record at the relevant time, MACP came to be decided laying down sole negligence of the driver of truck and the Tribunal in the judgment by allowing the claim petition had made claimant entitled to recover the compensation of Rs. 2,21,476/- with 9% interest from the date of petition till realization along with the proportionate cost from the opponents no. 3, 4 and 5 jointly and severally.

6. It appears that the claimant, as well as the insurance company - present applicant after the award would have realized that there was no policy in force in connection with the truck with United India Insurance Company Ltd., and while preferring the MACP Review Application no