WP(C) 5125/2000 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) 1. Heard Mr.K.K. Mahanta, learned senior counsel appearing for the petition er. Also heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Mr. A.J. Atia, learned counsel represents the re spondent No.3 who is the claimant in the MACT proceedings. 2. The writ petitioner who was the owner of the bus bearing Registration No . AS-J- 6117 has filed the present petition challenging the order dt. 7.8.2000 p assed by the Certificate Officer, Nagaon whereby in respect of the amount awarde d to the claimant by the learned MACT, Nagaon, a direction has been made for pay ment of the awarded amount by the owner/writ petitioner and by the Insurance Co. in equal proportion. 3. The bus owned by the writ petitioner met with an accident on 12.10.88 wh ich led to death of the husband of respondent No.3. Accordingly, respondent No. 3 Smti. Utpala Bora filed an application before the learned MACT, Nagaon claimin g compensation for the death of her husband. In the said proceedings the writ pe titioner was arrayed as O.P. No.1 and the Insurance Co. was arrayed as O.P. No.2 . 4. By an order dt. 15.6.93 the learned MACT held the claimant to be entitle d to a sum of Rs.2,28,400/- together with interest thereon @ 12% p.a. from 31.1 .89. The learned Tribunal also held the O.P. No.1 and 2 jointly and severally li able for the amount be paid to the claimant. After the entitlement of the claimant was finalized on 15.6.93, an application d t. 31.1.94 was filed by the Insurance Co. before the MACT claiming that in terms of the policy the maximum liability to be incurred by the Insurance Co. in one event is Rs.50,000/-. In the said application, the Insurance Co. claimed that as they have already deposited Rs.50,000/-, during the proceedings before the Trib unal with interest thereon, and their maximum liability being limited to Rs.50,0 00/-, necessary order be passed releasing the Insurance Co. from further liabili ties in the case. By order dt. 1.2.94, the learned MACT rejected the said application filed by the Insurance Co. on the ground that the plea taken by the Insurance Co. is belated and accordingly rejected the prayer made by the Insurance Co. to limit the exte nt of their liability for an amount of Rs. 50,000/-. 5. For getting the payment the claimant obtained certificate from the MACT and approached the Certificate Officer for necessary orders to obtain payment in terms of the order passed by the learned MACT, Nagaon. 6. By the impugned order dt. 7.8.2000, the Certificate Officer, Nagaon, in course of the execution proceedings directed that the amount payable to the clai mant is to be paid by both the writ petitioner (owner of the bus) and the Insura nce Co in equal proportion. 7. Mr. KK Mahanta, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended that such a direction given in course of the execution proceedings cou ld not have been given as the Insurance Co. did not take any plea seeking to lim it the extent of their liability, in course of the proceedings before the MACT. The subsequent plea taken by the Insurance Co. after the judgment dt. 15.6.93 pa ssed by the MACT, was also rejected by the learned Tribunal on 1.2.94. Under suc h circumstances the apportionment order made by the learned Certificate Officer was unwarranted in the facts of the instant case. Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Co, on the other hand, argues that the accident in the instant case occurred in 12.10.88 and in terms of provisions of Section 95(2)(b)(i) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, as existi ng then, maximum liability that can be imposed on the Insurance Co. would be li mited to Rs.50,000/- only. On the basis of the said statutory provisions, it is contended by Mr. Dutta, that the Certificate Officer had acted in accordance wit h law in passing the impugned order. Mr. A.J. Atia, learned counsel for the claimant has submitted that although the accident had taken place on 12.10.88, apart from receiving a sum of Rs.55,735/- (part of which is interest amount), the claimant is awaiting receipt of the bala nce payment ordered by the MACT for last so many years and accordingly the learn ed counsel prays that an order be passed for early disbursement of payment to th e claimant. 8. On consideration of the pleadings and submissions, it appears that the Ins urance Co. did not take any plea in course of the proceedings before the MACT pr ior to delivery of judgment on 15.3.96, seeking to limit its liability to the e xtent of Rs.50,000/-. In the absence of any such plea taken in course of the pro ceedings, I am of the view that the Insurance Co. ought not be permitted to rais e such a plea for the first time only after delivery of the judgment by the MACT . I am further of the view that the Certificate Officer, while discharging functi on as an Executing Authority, is not entitled to go beyond the judgment passed, which is before him for the purpose of execution only, and accordingly it would be incompetent for him to pass an order apportioning the liability of the ordere d amount between the owner of the vehicle /writ petitioner and the Insurance Co. Such an order was obviously without any authority of law and accordingly the sa me is interfered with. 9. As regards the plea made by the claimant for early disbursement of the am ount, a submission has been made that in the event of reduction of the interest awarded, the Insurance Co. would be prepared to expeditiously disburse the balan ce amount ordered to be paid to the claimant vide judgment dt. 15.3.96 by the le arned MACT, Nagaon. The learned MACT held the claimant to be entitled to a sum of Rs.2,28,400/- and further directed that the said amount would be payabletogether with interest @ 1 2% p.a. from 31.3.89. Mr. A.J. Atia appearing for the claimant submits that if the payment is made qui ckly by the Insurance Co., he is agreeable to receive a reduced amount by way of reduction in the rate of interest. In so far as interest is concerned, the Insurance Co. had already made payment o f Rs.5,735/- as interest before the MACT which is already received by the claima nt. 10. In view of the submissions made, the respondent No. 4 Insurance Co. is di rected to deposit the balance principal amount (after deducting an amount of Rs. 50,000/-) which is quantified as Rs.1,78,400/-. The said amount is to be deposit ed by the Insurance Co. within 60 days from today. The rate of interest payable on the quantified principal amount is reduced to 8% from 12% which will be appl ied w.e.f. 31.1.89. The Insurance Co. will make the necessary calculation to the extent of their lia bility towards payment of interest and deposit the quantified amount along with the principal amount of Rs. 1,78,400/- within the aforesaid period of 60 days. T he amount of Rs.5,735/- earlier paid towards interest, shall be set off from the amount of interest which will be now deposited by the Insurance Co. On making of the aforesaid payment by the Insurance Co. by an Account Payee Cheq ue in favour of the Registrar General of this Court, the claimant would be entit led to receive payment of the said deposited amount after proper identification of the claimant, to the satisfaction of the Registrar General. With the aforesaid order and direction the writ petition is allowed to the exten t as indicated above.