In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 3118 of 2008 Date of decision: March 30, 2009 Atul Garg .. Petitioner Vs. National Insurance Co. Limited and another .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Rajesh Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Maninder Arora, Advocate for Insurance Company. A.N. Jindal, J The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Moga, vide its award dated 25.7.2002, observed as under :- “In view of my findings on the above said issues, the claim petition succeeds. I accordingly accept the claim petition with costs and award a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Less the amount awarded under Sec. 140 of the Motor Vehicle Act if paid) as compensation on account of loss of love and affection caused due to the death of Shiv Chand Gupta in an accident which was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the respondent No.1. The claimants are entitled to recover the amount of compensation along with interest at the rate of 9% P.A. from the date of institution of the claim petition. Respondent No.3 is liable to pay the above amount of compensation to the claimants. Amount of compensation shall be deposited within two months. It is directed that payment of the amount which is Civil Revision No. 3118 of 2008 -2- *** required to be paid by the Insurance Company after the payment of the amount to the claimants, the respondent No.3 may proceed in accordance with Sec. 174 of the Motor Vehicle Act if the circumstances so existed and if the law so warrants. It is made clear that out sum of Rs.1,50,000/- the claimant NO.1 shall be entitled to Rs.50,000/- and the claimants No.2, 3, 4 and 6 shall be entitled to Rs.25,000/- each. Memo of costs be prepared accordingly and file be consigned to the record room.” Now during the execution proceedings, the objector has raised the objection that the Insurance Company could not recover the amount from the objector before the claim is got adjudicated from the competent court. This argument lack merit. It is noticed that Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, vide its judgment dated 25.7.2002 observed that the driver of the offending vehicle was having fake driving licence and that the Insurance Compnay shall pay the amount of compensation to the claimants and would be at liberty to recover the same from the owner and the driver, who are jointly and severally liable to pay the same. In these circumstances, Section 174 of the Act permits the Insurance Company to recover the amount from the insured after it has paid the same to the claimant. Further adjudication of the claim by the company from the competent court was not essential. This matter has stood settled in case National Insurance Company vs. Geeta Devi, 2002 (2) RCR (Civil) 691 wherein it was observed as under :- Civil Revision No. 3118 of 2008 -3- *** “The tribunal has already found that the insurer shall be entitled to reimbursement from the owner. In view of the provisions of Section 174, we have no doubt that the competent authority shall proceed in accordance with law. In any case, the money to be paid by the insurer goes out of public funds. It is only fair that these funds are protected and that the Tribunal takes every possible measures to ensure reimbursement. Section 174 embodies this principal. It shall be kept kin view by the Tribunal.” As such, it is observed that there is no necessity for adjudication of the claim afresh by the Insurance Company and the Insurance Company could implement the award against the owner and the driver. Resultantly, finding no merit in the petition the same is dismissed. March 30, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge