IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2009 / 14TH ASWINA 1931 MACA.No. 156 of 2009(D) ----------------------------------- (AGAINST THE AWARD DTD. 03/04/2008 IN O.P.(M.V).NO.1295/2005 OF M.A.C.T., PALA) ............. APPELLANT/ 3RD RESPONDENT IN THE O.P(M.V): ------------------------------------------------------------------------ THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD, DIVISIONAL OFFICE KOTTAYAM, REP; BY THE DEPUTY MANAGER,UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD,OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL MANAGER,HOSPITAL ROAD, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. MR.M.A.GEORGE. RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT 1 AND 2 IN THE O.P(M.V): ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. SASI, S/O.NARAYANAN,ORAPPANKAL HOUSE, VAYALA.P.O,KOTTAYAM. 2. SAJI.P, KOYLPPURATHU HOUSE,VEMPALLY.P.O. 3. P.V.BABY,PARATHOTTIYIL HOUSE, KOODALLOR.P.O. R1 & R3 BY ADV. MR.S.PRASANTH. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/10/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.A.C.A. NO. 156/2009-D: ORDER ON I.A. NO. 167/2009 IN M.A.C.A. NO. 156/2009-D DISMISSED 06/10/2009. SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 156 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 6th day of October, 2009. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pala in O.P.(MV)1295/05. The claim petition was allowed and the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.1,04,685/- with 12% interest from 30.9.2004, the date of accident till realisation with costs. The only challenge before this Court is regarding the rate of interest as well as the date from which the interest is to be awarded. I feel that the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has restricted the compensation that is payable under the Workmen's Compensation Act and thought it fit to award the interest as contemplated under the Workmen's Compensation Act. The said approach is erroneous. No party is compelled to move the Tribunal for the purpose of receiving the compensation under S.167 of the M.V.Act. An option is given to the party to approach the Workmen's compensation Commissioner or the Motor Accidents Claims M.A.C.A. 156 OF 2009 -:2:- Tribunal and therefore it is for the party to decide the forum and therefore it has to be stated that as the party had approached the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal which functions under the provisions of the M.V.Act only the provisions of the M.V.Act can be looked into and applied for the purpose of deciding the case. Actually when compensation is awarded in such cases a Division Bench of this Court even held that the compensation is restricted to a particular amount only which is due from the insurance company and really if it is not limited the compensation to be fixed and ordered to be paid by the other opposite party. But I am not going into those aspects in this case because there is no such contentions before me. Under S.171 of the M.V.Act discretionary power is given to the Tribunal to award simple interest. Unlike the provisions under the Workmen's Compensation Act here it is a discretionary jurisdiction vests with the Tribunal and the normal practice adopted by the Tribunals are to take into consideration the lending rate, inflation etc. and grant a reasonable rate of interest. M.A.C.A. 156 OF 2009 -:3:- Recently the Apex Court after considering the materials in the year 2007 had held that in Motor Accident cases an interest of 7.5% will be reasonable and that has to be paid only from the date of making the claim and not from an earlier date. S.171 of the M.V.Act very clearly states that the interest shall be paid not earlier than the date of making the claim. Therefore the finding that the interest has to be paid from the date of accident cannot be sustained in view of S.171 of the M.V.Act. Therefore I modify the award of the Tribunal whereby I hold that the rate of interest which the claimant is entitled to is 7.5% per annum that too from the date of petition and the insurance company shall be liable to pay only the same. Appeal disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-