Civil Revision No.6019 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.6019 of 2008 Date of decision : 31-7-2009 National Insurance Company Limited ....Petitioner VERSUS Shri Lakhwinder Singh and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA Present: Mr. D.P. Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. RAJIVE BHALLA, J. The petitioner, Insurance Company impugns the order dated 28-04-2008, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the MACT), Karnal, dismissing its application for recovery of the awarded amount from the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle. A claim petition was filed by respondents No.3 and 4 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 claiming compensation on account of the demise of their child Santosh Rani, in a motor accident. The claimants impleaded the driver and owner as respondents No.1 and 2 and the Insurance Company as respondent No.3. Civil Revision No.6019 of 2008 -2- The MACT, Karnal vide Award dated 01-10-2001 awarded Rs.60,000/- as compensation, and despite accepting the stand of the Insurance Company that the licence was forged, directed the Insurance Company to pay the amount so awarded. Liberty was however granted to the Insurance Company to recover the amount from the insured as per law. The operative part of the Award, reads as follows:- “Thus, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is held that respondent no.3 is liable to pay the amount of compensation to the claimants and the company may recover the amount from the insured as per law.” After paying compensation to the claimants, the Insurance Company filed a petition u/s 174 of the Motor Vehicle Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), seeking to enforce the liberty granted under the Award. The MACT, Karnal dismissed the application by relegating the Insurance Company to the remedy of filing a civil suit. Counsel for the petitioner submits that as by the Award, liberty was granted to the Insurance Company to recover compensation in accordance with law, the Insurance Company is entitled to execute the award against the owner and driver of the truck. It is submitted that the judgment referred to by the MACT, relates to a case where the Hon'ble High Court had directed the Insurance Company to recover the compensation by filing a civil suit and therefore does not apply to the instant case. Despite service, no one has put appearance on behalf of the respondents particularly respondents No.1 and 2 who are the Civil Revision No.6019 of 2008 -3- contesting respondents. I have heard counsel for the petitioner, perused the impugned order and am satisfied that the MACT has committed an error in placing reliance upon the judgment reported as National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Smt. Bhateri and others, 2006(2) PLR 302 and Malkiat Singh vs. Mohinder Singh and others, 2007 A.C.J. 2370 to dismiss the application. In these cases the matter regarding recovery was left open to the Insurance Company or the Company was specifically directed to seek its remedy before a civil court. In the present case, liberty has been granted to the insurance company to recover the amount in accordance with law. While considering a similar controversy, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Swaran Singh and others, 2004 ACJ 1 as follows:- (ix) The claims Tribunal constituted under Section 165 read with Section 168 is empowered to adjudicate all claims in respect of the accidents involving death or bodily injury or damage to property of third party arising from use of motor vehicle. The said power of the Tribunal is not restricted to decide the claims, inter se, between claimant or claimants on one side and insured, insurer and driver on the other. In the course of adjudicating the claim for compensation and to decide the availability of defence or defences to the insurer, the Tribunal has necessarily the power and jurisdiction to decide disputes inter se between insurer and the insured. The decision rendered on the claims and disputes inter se between the insurer and insured in the course of adjudication of claim for compensation by the claimants and the award made thereon is enforceable and executable in Civil Revision No.6019 of 2008 -4- the same manner as provided in Section 174 of the Act for enforcement and execution of the award in favour of the claimants. (x) Where on adjudication of the claim under the Act the tribunal arrives at a conclusion that the insurer has satisfactorily proved its defence in accordance with the provisions of section 149(2) read with sub-section (7), as interpreted by this Court above, the Tribunal can direct that the insurer is liable to be reimbursed by the insured for the compensation and other amounts which it has been compelled to pay to the third party under the award of the Tribunal. Such determination of claim by the Tribunal will be enforceable and the money found due to the insurer from the insured will be recoverable on a certificate issued by the Tribunal to the Collector in the same manner under Section 174 of the Act as arrears of land revenue. The certificate will be issued for the recovery as arrears of land revenue only if, as required by sub-section (3) of Section 168 of the Act the insured fails to deposit the amount awarded in favour of the insurer within thirty days from the date of announcement of the award by the Tribunal. A perusal of the extract of the judgment leaves no manner of doubt that where the Tribunal confers a right upon an Insurance Company to seek recovery in accordance with law, the Insurance Company would be entitled to enforce the Award. The expression "....in accordance with law...." leaves it open to the Insurance Company to choose the procedure prescribed by section 174 of the Act or to file a civil suit. Section 174 of the Act reads as follows:- "174. Recovery of money from insurer as arrear of land revenue.- Where any amount is due from any person under Civil Revision No.6019 of 2008 -5- an award, the Claims Tribunal may, on an application made to it by the person entitled to the amount, issue a certificate for the amount to the Collector and the Collector shall proceed to recover the same in the same manner as an arrear of land reveune." A perusal of Section 174 discloses that where any amount is due from any person the Tribunal may, on an application filed by "the person" entitled to the amount, issue a certificate to the Collector for recovery of this amount. The expression "the person" entitled to the amount would necessarily include an insurance company in view of Section 3(42) of the General Clauses Act, 1897 reads as follows:- "person" shall include any company or association or body of individuals, whether incorporated or not;" It is, therefore, apparent that Section 174 of the Act read along with Section 3(42) of the General Clauses Act 1897 would entitle an Insurance Company, to approach the Tribunal under Section 174 of the Act. In view of what has been stated hereinabove, the revision petition is allowed, the order dated 28-4-2008 is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karnal to proceed with the petition filed under Section 174 of the Act afresh and in accordance with law. (RAJIVE BHALLA) 31-07-2009 JUDGE manju