T. Nandakumar Singh, J.

1. Heard Mr. D.K. Biswas, learned Counsel for the Petitioner-insurance company as well as Mr. Somik Deb, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent-claimants.

2. This revision petition is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (M.A.O.) dated 13.7.2009 rejecting the application for review under Order XLVII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the Petitioner-insurance company for reviewing judgment and award dated 2.7.2007 passed by the learned Claims Tribunal in T.S. (M.A.C.) 241 of 2005.

3. For deciding the matter in issue, the only bare minimal facts loading to filing of T.S. (M.A.C.) 241 of 2005 are recapitulated:

The Respondent-claimants instituted T.S. (M.A.C.) 241 of 2005 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MV Act, 1988) for a compensation of Rs. 13,27,000 (Rupees thirteen lakh twenty-seven thousand) only for the death of their full blood brother, Shri Rana Debnath, due to vehicular accident on 3.3.2005 near Suijyamani Nagar ration shop over Agartala-Bishalgarh road due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle (Commander Jeep) bearing registration No. TR. TR-01-A/2588 by its driver. The said offending vehicle is insured with the Petitioner-insurance company.

The Insurance Company on receipt of process of learned Claims Tribunal entered appearance and by filing their written statement keenly contested the said claim by denying each and every claim. The Petitioner-Insurance Company also denied the incident of the accident that had occurred for the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver and further asserted that the claim of the Respondent-claimants should be dismissed. The learned Claims Tribunal after perusal of the rival contentions of the parties in their respective pleadings had framed the following issues for deciding T.S (M.A.C.) 241 of 2005:

(1) Whether the deceased Rana Debnath died on 3.3.2008 over the Agartala-Bishalgarh road because of vehicular accident and if so whether the said incident of accident had occurred for the rash and negligent driving of the vehicle (offending vehicle) bearing registration No. TR-01-A-2588 by its driver?

(2) Who will pay the compensation? and

(3) Whether the Petitioners are entitled to any relief and if so up to what extent?

4. On perusal of records of the LCR of TS (M.A.C.) 241 of 2005 and also memo of the revision petition. It appears that the Petitioner-Insurance Company did not obtain the leave under Section170 of the M.V. Act, to defend the claim of the Respondent-claimants on all or any of the grounds which are available to the persons against whom the claim is made.

The learned Claims Tribunal, for the reasons mentioned in the judgment and award dated 2.7.2007 passed in T.S (M.A.C.) 241 of 2005 by using the multiplier, 16' had calculated the total amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,84,000; and also further awarded an amount of Rs, 2,000 as funeral expenses of the deceased, Rana Debnath and another amount of Rs. 2,000 as transportation charge. The Petitioner-Insurance Company was directed to pay the compensation, i.e., total amount of Rs. 3,88,000 (Rupees three lakh eighty-eight thousand) to the Respondent-claimants within two month with interest at the rate of 6% from the date of filing of the claim petition, i.e., 24.04.2005 and it the Petitioner-insurance company failed to pay the awarded compensation amount within two months from the date of passing the judgment and award, shall have to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum over the awarded compensation till realization of the same from the date of filing the claim petition.

5. It is admitted case of both the parties that the Claims Tribunal has all the trappings of a Court and the proceedings before it closely resemble to the proceedings in a civil Court; and that Legislature purposely did not make all the provisions of the Code applicable to the proceedings before t