MAC .APP.No.978/2006 Page 1 of 3 4 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC.APP. 978/2006 Date of Decision: 19th May, 2009 % BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE ..... Appellant Through : Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv. versus IMRAN HUSSAIN & ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary, Adv. CORAM :- THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may Yes be allowed to see the Judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be Yes reported in the Digest? JUDGMENT (Oral) 1. The appellant has challenged the award of the learned Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.10,27,924/- has been awarded to claimant/respondent No.1. The accident dated 29/30th July, 2005 resulted in the grievous injuries to claimant/respondent No.1. The claimant suffered 75% permanent disability. The disability is in the nature of Traumatic Paraparesis, i.e., weakness on lower limb and the claimant has no strength in lower limb even to stand or to MAC .APP.No.978/2006 Page 2 of 3 walk without any support. The claimant was working as Constable in Delhi Home Guard and his loss of earning capacity has been taken to be 100%. 2. The appellant has challenged the quantum of compensation awarded to the claimant. However, there is no permission under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act. It is well settled that without the permission of 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the Insurance Company cannot challenge the award of the learned Tribunal on quantum. Reference in this regard is made in the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Nicolletta Rohtagi, (2002) 7 SCC 456 and Shankarayya vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., (1998) 3 SCC 140 where the Hon’ble Supreme Court has clearly held that in the absence of defence as envisaged under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act being taken over by the insurance company, the appeal filed by the insurance company cannot be maintained. 3. Notwithstanding the bar of Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is also just fair and reasonable. 4. For all the above reasons, the appeal as well as all the pending application are dismissed. 5. The appellant has deposited the entire award amount along with interest with the learned Tribunal in terms of the order dated 4th December, 2006 out of which 75% of the MAC .APP.No.978/2006 Page 3 of 3 award amount has been released to respondent No.1. 6. The learned Tribunal is directed to release the remaining award amount to claimant/respondent No.1. 7. Learned counsel for claimant submits that the interest be also awarded for the period during which the appeal remained pending. If the entire award amount has been deposited along with interest with the learned Tribunal, the claimant would not be entitled to any further interest. 8. Copy of this order be given ‘Dasti’ to learned counsel for the parties under signatures of Court Master. J.R. MIDHA, J MAY 19, 2009 mk