1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR J U D G M E N T VISHNU VS. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. & ORS. 1. S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.703/2008 SMT.MUNNA BAI & ORS. VS. NATIONALINSURANCE CO. & ORS. 2. S.B.CIVIL MISC.APPEAL NO.708/2008 against the judgment and interim award dated 02.05.2008 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chittorgarh in Civil Misc. Case No.21/2008 (MAC Claim Case No.707/2006) and Civil Misc. Case No.22/2008 (MAC Case No.706/2006). DATE OF JUDGMENT : 06.08.2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANAK MOHTA Mr.Manish Pitaliya for the appellants. Mr.TRS Sodha ] for the respondents. Mr.P.Nayak ] BY THE COURT : Both these appeals have been filed by the claimant 2 appellants, against the judgment and interim award passed by the learned tribunal, under the no fault liability. In the case of death of Radhey Shyam, a sum of Rs. Rs.50,000/- to his legal representatives claimant appellants in MACT Case No.22/97 (CMA No.708/2008) and Rs.25,000/- have been awarded to injured claimant appellant Vishnu Pattidar, in MACT Case No.21/2008 (CMA No.703/2008) vide judgment and order dated 02.05.08. While passing the interim award, the learned tribunal has also imposed a condition that the amount will be disbursed, only after furnishing the security by the owner of the vehicle. By way of appeals, the claimant appellants in both the cases have challenged the condition imposed by the learned tribunal. As both the appeals arise out of the single accident and common question of law and facts has been raised, therefore, they were heard together, and are being disposed of by a common judgment. The brief facts of the case are that,on 04.08.06 an accident took place arising out of use of motor vehicle (Mini bus)No.RJ.03-P-1575 , in which victim got injured and other person Radhey Shyam died. The claim petitions were filed in motor accident case No.703/2008, in which the claimant 3 appellant was injured, and in case No.708, the victim Radhey Shyam died. His Legal Representatives have filed claim petition under section 166 of the M.V. Act. Along with claim petition, the claimants, have also filed applications under section 140 of the M.V. Act for awarding interim award under the head of no fault liability. After hearing both the sides, the learned tribunal vide order dated 02.05.08 awarded, interim award as stated aforesaid. But imposed a condition that money will be disbursed to claimants, after furnishing security by the owner of vehicle. Against that, the claimants have filed aforesaid appeals. Notices of appeals were given, records were called and parties were heard. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the claimant appellants submitted that the learned tribunal was under a legal obligation to decide the application for awarding interim award under section 140 of the M.V.Act and in this case, the learned tribunal has decided and awarded interim compensation but while awarding interim compensation, on the defence plea of the insurer of the 4 vehicle, has imposed an unreasonable condition that the amount awarded under interim relief will be paid only after furnishing security by the owner of the vehicle. It was contended that virtually such type of condition amounts to denial of interim award. That was not the theme behind section 140 of the M.V.Act. It was further contended that the defence raised by the insurer, are much related to the owner of the vehicle, and they are nothing concerned with claimants. Therefore, the condition imposed by the learned tribunal, while awarding the interim award, be quashed and set aside and the amount may be ordered to be disbursed immediately. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Insurance Company, supported the order and contended that their defence pleas were rightly considered by the learned tribunal, while awarding interim award. In support of his contention, he also relied on Smt. Yallawwa v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. [2007 (3) T.A.C. 1 (S.C.)] and National Insurance Co.Ltd. v. Challa Bharathamma & Ors. [2004 (2) WLC (SC)689] . I have considered the rival submissions and perused the judgment and interim award passed by the learned tribunal. 5 The learned tribunal, while considering the defence pleas taken by the insurer, in his reply , has imposed a condition of furnishing security at the time of awarding interim award. But the said defence pleas are much related to fixing of responsibility between the owner of the vehicle and the insurer. The amount awarded under the interim award, is subject to final adjustment of the final award. Thus, in my opinion, the condition imposed by the learned tribunal was not just and reasonable. I have also considered the authorities cited by the learned counsel for the insurer. But they are not helping their contentions. On the basis of the aforesaid discussion, both the appeals deserve to be allowed and the condition imposed by the learned tribunal is liable to be set aside. In the net result , both the appeals are allowed and the condition imposed by the learned tribunal , while passing the interim award dated 20.05.08, is hereby quashed and set aside. The claimant will be entitled to receive the amount as per the interim award given by the learned tribunal. The insurer 6 will deposit the amount immediately, and the claimants will be entitled to receive the same. No order as to costs. (MANAK MOHTA), J. l.george