1 Civil Appln.No.144.10. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 144 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 17497h OF 1995 New India Assurance company ...APPLICANT VERSUS Rukhminibai W/o Bajirao Gaikwad and others. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri.A.S.Osmanpurkar,Advocate holding for Shri. K.A.Kulkarni, Advocate for applicant. .. CORAM: K.K. TATED, JJ. DATE : 1ST OCTOBER, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel Mr.Kulkarni for applicant. Though, the respondents are served no one appeared at the time of hearing. 2. This Civil Application is preferred by the original appellant-Insurance company Under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for 2 Civil Appln.No.144.10. modification of operative order in the judgment and order passed by this Court on 30th April, 2009 in First Appeal No. 174 of 1995. The applicant made prayer clause “B” as under : “B. The judgment and award passed by the Lower Court Dist. Judge -Ex-Officio Member Claims Tribunal, Latur Dated 07.12.1994 in MAC No.19/1993 be kindly set aside and specific orders regarding recovery the amount of Rs.61,000/- together with interest @ 12% P.A. from the owner of the vehicle i. e. respondent No.6 be kindly passed.” A FEW FACTS OF THE MATTER ARE AS UNDER : 3. The respondent Nos. 1 to 5 original claimants preferred Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 19 of 1993 under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, in the Court of District Judge-Ex- Officio Member of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Latur claiming compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh). The respondents No 1 to 5 are 3 Civil Appln.No.144.10. legal representative of deceased Bajirao Ramrao Gaikwad, who died in accident dated 30th July, 1992. 4. The Tribunal decided Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 19 of 1993, by its judgment and award dated 7th December, 1994, holding that the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 are entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs.61,000/-. The operative part of the said judgment dated 7th December, 1994, reads as follows: “Petition is partly allowed. Respondent No.3 the insurance company is hereby directed to deposit with the Tribunal a sum of Rs.61,000/-(Rs Sixty one Thousand) within a month from the date of this order towards full and final settlement of claimants’ claim under sections 166 and 140 of M. V. Act with costs and interest. On receiving the deposit, an amount of Rs.16,000/-(Rs. Sixteen Thousand) shall be paid in cash to claimant No.1 Rukhminbai by an account -payee 4 Civil Appln.No.144.10. cheque for the benefit of herself and claimant Nos. 2 and 3(Abhimanyu and Gajanan Respectively) Amount of Rs.15,000/-(Rs. Fifteen thousand) each shall be invested in purchasing National savings certificates in the names of claimant No.1 Rukhminbai, claimant No.2 Abhimanyu and claimant No.3 Gajanan respectively. The guardian of claimant No. 2 and 3 would be claimant No.1 Rukhminbai. As claimant No.4 Sow Chabubai and claimant No.5 Sow Ratnamala are married daughters of the deceased, they have not been given any share in the amount of award. 5. Being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 7th December, 1994 passed by the Tribunal, applicant-Insurance Company preferred First Appeal No. 174 of 1995 in this Court on several grounds. The said appeal was allowed, by the Judgment and order dated 30th April, 2009 on the ground that the driver of the tractor, involved in the accident was not holding valid license on the date of the accident i. e. 30th July, 1992 and therefore 5 Civil Appln.No.144.10. Insurance company is not responsible to pay the compensation to the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 ( Original claimants). 6. Mr. Kulkarni, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant states that, as per award passed by the Tribunal they deposited sum of Rs.61,000/-(Rupees Sixty One Thousand) with the lower Court. The said amount was withdrawn by the respondent Nos. 1 to 5(Original claimants). It is the contention of the applicant that as they are not liable to pay the said compensation of Rs. 61,000/-(Rupees Sixty One Thousand) to the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 (Original claimants), Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal be set aside under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The applicant further prayed that specific order regarding recovery of the amount of Rs. 61,000/-(Rupees Sixty one Thousand) together with interest @ Rs. 12% p.a. from the owner of the vehicle be passed in this Review Petition. 6 Civil Appln.No.144.10. 7. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant at length. It is to be noted that by this Civil Application, the applicant is seeking relief to set aside judgment and award passed by the Tribunal dated 7th December, 1994, in Motor Accident Claims Tribunal petition No. 19 of 1993. 8. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that in the interest of justice this Hon’ble Court be pleased to pass specific order regarding recovery of amount of Rs.61,000/- together with interest @ Rs.12% p.a. from the owner of the vehicle as Judgment and Award passed by the Tribunal is set aside. He submits that in view of the Apex Court judgments in the matter of United India Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Rakesh Kumar Arora and others reported in 2008DGLS (Soft.) 1097, Balbir Kaur and others Vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd. And others reported in 2009 DGLS (Soft.) 545 and New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kusum and others reported 7 Civil Appln.No.144.10. in 2009 DGLS (Soft.) 1005, the Insurance Company is entitled to recover the amount deposited by them from the owner. 9. It is true that in these authorities the Apex Court specifically held that if there is breach of terms and conditions of Insurance Policy and same is proved by the Insurance Company, in that case the Court can not pass order directing Insurance Company to pay the compensation first and then recover the same from owner and responsible person. In the present case, Tribunal passed the Judgment and Award dated 7th December, 1994 holding Insurance Company only responsible for payment of compensation. There is no order against either owner and or driver of the vehicle to make payment. Therefore, there is no question of passing of any new decree in review petition holding the owner of vehicle responsible for making the payment. 10. Such prayer is not maintainable under 8 Civil Appln.No.144.10. section 151 of the Code of Civil procedure. The scope of section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure is limited. The Court has no inherent power to do that which is prohibited by the Code. The Court has no power after judgment is signed, to alter or add to it, as doing so would be in direct contravention of the provisions of Order 20 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Inherent jurisdiction must be exercised subject to the rules that if the Code does not contain specific provision, which would meet necessities of the case, such provisions should be followed, and the inherent jurisdiction should not be invoked. In the present case when appeal preferred by the applicant-Insurance Company is allowed, they have restitution under Section 144 of Code of Civil Procedure. 11. Where certain orders are passed in a suit and suit is thereafter disposed off, an application under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, challenging those orders as being 9 Civil Appln.No.144.10. without jurisdiction and for restoration of the suit, is incompetent, there being specific remedy under the Code by way of appeal or revision. It is to be noted that inherent power of the Court is in addition to and complementary to the powers expressly conferred under the Code of Civil Procedure, but that power will not be exercised if its exercise is inconsistent with, or comes into conflict with, any other power expressly or by necessary implication conferred by the other provisions of the Code. 12. In the present case, once Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is set aside, the applicant has alternate remedy to recover the said amount. Once appeal is decided on its own merit, impugned order in the said appeal can not be set aside under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Hence, the application stands rejected. No order as to costs. Sd/- [K.K. TATED, J.] MTK