JUDGMENT :

Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.

M.A. No. 395 of 2013

Perusal of the record reveals that the though the notice was issued to the respondent no. 2 and the summon was properly addressed and duly sent by registered post acknowledgment due but neither the postal envelope nor any card has been received, hence, in terms of the proviso of Order V Rule 9(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, the service of notice upon respondent no. 2 is sufficient.

M.A. No. 340 of 2013 with M.A. No. 395 of 2013

By the Court:-Heard the parties.

2. Since both appeals have arisen out of the same judgment, hence, these appeals are disposed of by this common judgment.

3. These Miscellaneous Appeals are directed against the judgment and award dated 03.07.2013 passed by learned District & Additional Sessions Judge II-cum-MACT, Judge, Dhanbad in Title (Motor Vehicles) Case no. 292 of 2010 whereby and where under, in an application under Section 166 of the M.V.Act. 1988, learned tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 12,78,076/-and after deducting Rs. 50,000/-under Section 140 of the M.V. Act, directed the insurance company to pay the remaining amount with interest thereon @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the suit ti