The main legal point established is that the Insurance Company has a very limited defense and cannot challenge the award on grounds not available under Section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

1. - This Misc. appeal has been filed by the National Insurance Company against whom award was passed by MACT Judge, Kothputli on 25th October, 1997.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner raised so many points submitting that the Insurance Company was made a party before the Tribunal after a lapse of much time, the details of insurance policy were not submitted to the Insurance Company for a long time and that the award suffers from many infirmities as it is clear from the evidence on record. For example, the claimant specifically mentioned that both the drivers of the bus and track were negligent in driving and therefore, the question of contributory negligence was not considered. Statement of claimant was ignored by the learned Tribunal and liability of company has been wrongly fixed. The Tribunal has also grossly erred in completely giving go by to the principles of natural justice. He has, therefore, submitted that the award passed by the Tribunal should be set aside.

3. On the other hand, learned Counsel for claimant-respondents has submitted that the Insurance Company has very limited defence and that the learned Counsel for the appellant cannot controvert this position of law. He submitted that the quantum of the award cannot be challenged by the Insurance Company unless the same is covered by the provisions contained in Section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act (Section 96 of the Old Motor Vehicles Act). He has relied on the following judgments given by this Court : (1) SB Civil Misc. Appeal No. 358/93, The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Rajo and another, decided on 25th October, 1993 and (2) S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 107/94, The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Kiran and others, decided on 15th March, 1994 In the later case i.e. Misc. Appeal No. 107/94 (supra), it was observed that the Insurance Company cannot file an appeal on the ground that the amount awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, is excessive. In Misc. Appeal No. 358/93 (supra) relying on 1993 A.C.C. (2) page 96, 1993 A.C.C. page 100 and A.I.R. 1959 SC page 1331, it was held that the Assurance Company is estopped from challenging the award on the grounds which are not available to the Assurance Company under Section 96 of Motor Vehicles Act. (Section 149 of the new Act). In view of this position of law, the learned Counsel was unable to satisfy as to how the amount awarded was excessive. The settled law is that the Insurance Company has very limited defence. No argument was built before this Court within the purview of that limited defence.

4. Consequently, there is no force in this appeal and the same is hereby dismissed with cost of Rs. 1,000/-.Appeal dismissed.

*******