SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(MP) 29

B.A.KHAN, SHAMBHOO SINGH
BHAYLA – Appellant
Versus
ABDUL KAYUM – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ANIL GOEL, RAJPAL SINGH BAGHEL

( 1 ) APPELLANTS were awarded compensation of Rs. 2,84,000/- with 12% interest p. a. from the date of award by MACT, Barwani. But they are claiming interest from the date of claim petition. Are they entitled so as of right and was Tribunal under an obligation to award interest from the date of claim petition. In other words it is their right to claim so and is any corresponding duty cast on Tribunal to award so.

( 2 ) APPELLANTS' counsel Mr. Rajpal placed reliance on Section 171 of M. V. Act, 1988 in support. He interpreted this provision to suggest that though Tribunal was out of bounds to award interest prior to claim petition, it was under duty to award interest from the date of claim petition.

( 3 ) THE submission seems based on gross misappreciation of the terms of Section 171 The relevant section is reproduced hereunder and reads thus :-"award of interest where any claim is allowed - Where any Claims Tribunal allows a claim for compensation made under this Act, such Tribunal may direct that in addition to the amount of compensation simple interest shall also be paid at such rate and from such date not earlier than the date of making the claim as it may specify in this behalf.





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top