C.R No. 2389 of 2007 ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R No. 2389 of 2007 Date of decision : July 29, 2009 Niranjan Singh and another, ...... Appellant (s) v. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. ...... Respondent(s) *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI *** Present : Mr. A.K.Jaswal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for the respondent. *** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? *** AJAY TEWARI, J (Oral) The short point involved in this revision petition is regarding power of a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in a situation where the insurer has to recover money from the insured person. Counsel for the petitioners has argued that under Section 174 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ( for short “the Act”), there is a set procedure and the Tribunal cannot change the same. Section 174 of the Act is reproduced herein below :- “ 174.Recovery of money from insurer as arrear of C.R No. 2389 of 2007 ::2:: land revenue.- Where any amount is due from any person under an award, the Claims Tribunal may, on an application made to it by the person entitled to the amount, issue a certificate for the amount to the Collector and the Collector shall proceed to recover the same in the same manner as an arrear of land revenue.” No doubt, a perusal of Section 174 of the Act does initially lend itself to the interpretation that in execution, power of the Tribunal constituted under the Act is only to issue a recovery certificate. However, counsel for the respondent has relied upon Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd v. Nanjappan and others, 2004 Accidents Claims Journal 721, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as follows :- “ 8. Therefore, while setting aside the judgment of the High Court we direct in terms of what has been stated in Baljit Kaur's case, 2004 ACJ 428 (SC), that the insurer shall pay the quantum of compensation fixed by the Claims Tribunal, about which there was no dispute raised, to the respondents-claimants within 3 months from today. For the purpose of recovering the same from the insured, the insurer shall not be required to file a suit. It may initiate a proceeding before the concerned executing court as if the dispute between the insurer and the owner was the subject-matter of determination before the Tribunal and the issue is decided against the owner and in favour of the insurer. Before release of the amount to the insured, owner of the vehicle shall be C.R No. 2389 of 2007 ::3:: issued a notice and he shall be required to furnish security for the entire amount which the insurer will pay to the claimants. The offending vehicle shall be attached, as a part of the security. If necessity arises the executing court shall take assistance of the concerned Regional Transport Authority. The executing court shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as to the manner in which the insured, owner of the vehicle shall make payment to the insurer. In case there is any default it shall be open to the executing court to direct realization by disposal of the securities to be furnished or from any other property or properties of the owner of the vehicle, the insured. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms, with no order as to costs.” In view of this authoritative pronouncement of law, this revision petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. As the main petition has since been dismissed, all the pending civil miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) July 29, 2009. JUDGE `kk'