IMPORTANT POINTS
The provisions under Rule 9 of the Rules Regarding Fee Payable to Advocates will be attracted only in claim petitions in which the junior practitioner engaged with the senior practitioner was on record at least from the date of settlement of issues, the Tribunals shall verify the said fact before allowing cost. The Tribunal shall ensure that the name of the junior practitioner is also shown in the head note of the award.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, J.

1. The appellant is the 3rd respondent insurer in O.P. (MV) No. 170 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda, a claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by respondents 1 to 4, claiming compensation on account of the death of one Linju son of the 1st respondent and brother of respondents 2 to 4, in a motor accident which occurred on 07.09.2011, while he was walking along the side of a public road. At the place of accident, he was knocked down by a motorcycle bearing registration No. KL-4/X-6542, owned by the 5th respondent and ridden by the 6th respondent herein and insured with the appellant insurer. In the accident, he sustained fatal injuries, who succumbed to the injuries on the very next day, while undergoing inpatient treatment. Alleging that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent riding of motorcycle by its rider, claim petition was filed before the Tribunal, claiming a total compensation of Rs. 7,00,000/- under various heads.

2. Before the Tribunal, the owner and rider of the motorcycle remained absent and they were set ex-parte. The insurer filed written statement admitting the policy coverage of the motorcycle; however, denying its involvement in the accident. The insurer contended that the compensation claimed under various heads is on the higher side.

3. Before the Tribunal, Exts.A1 to A11 were marked on the side of the claimants. The police officer, who submitted Ext.A2 final report in Crime No. 637/11 of Haripad Police Station, was examined as RW-1. The case diary of the said crime was marked as Ext.X1.

4. After considering the pleadings and materials on record, the Tribunal arrived at a conclusion that the deceased sustained fatal injuries in a motor accident involving motorcycle bearing registration No. KL-4/X-6542 and that accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle by its rider. Since insurance coverage of the said vehicle was not in dispute, the appellant insurer was held liable to indemnify the insured. Under various heads, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs. 15,55,550/- together with interest at the rate 9% per annum, from 06.03.2012 till the date of realisation, with proportionate cost, and directed the insurer to satisfy the award. The 1st respondent/1st claimant, who was the mother of the deceased, was found entitled for the entire amount of compensation.

5. Challenging the findings of the Tribunal that the deceased sustained fatal injuries in a motor accident involving motorcycle bearing registration No. KL-4/X-6542 and that accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle by its rider, the appellant insurer is before this Court in this appeal. The insurer has also challenged the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal under various heads.

6. On 04.12.2019, when this appeal came up for consideration, this Court admitted the matter on file. In I.A. No. 2816 of 2017, this Court granted an interim order of stay, which reads thus:

“There will be an interim stay, as prayed for, for a period of two months, on condition that the appellant/insurer satisfies 50% of the total compensation awarded by the Tribunal with proportionate interest, within three weeks.

It would be open to the 1s respondent/claimant to move the Tribunal for disbursement of the said amount, in which event, the Tribunal shall consider that request taking note of the law on the point and also the directives issued by this Court in Circular No. 3 of 2019 dated 06.09.2019 and clarified further in Official Memorandum No. D1-62475/2016 dated 07.11.2019.”

7. Seeking review of the above interim order of stay dated 04.12.2019, the appellant insurer has filed R.P. No. 15 of 2020, which ended in dismissal by a separate order dated this day.

8. Heard the learned counsel for the appel