HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD L.P.A.No. 233 of 2001 Date: 08-02-2011 Between: M. Ramulu and others ……… Appellants and M/s. United India Insurance Company Limited and another ……….. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD L.P.A.No. 233 of 2001 ORDER: (Per BPR, J) The appellants are the claimants who filed this Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, inter alia, seeking to assail the correctness of the order, dated 30-06-1998 passed in A.A.O.No.1126 of 1992 by a learned single Judge of this Court, reducing the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The brief facts of the case are that on 26-10-1988, while the deceased was riding the bicycle, a lorry bearing No.MMS 4001, being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, came from behind and hit the deceased, due to which he died on the spot. Therefore, the claim petition was filed claiming compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-, and the same was contested by the owner of the vehicle as well as the insurance company. After conducting regular enquiry, the Tribunal awarded the total compensation of Rs.81,240/-. Challenging the same, the insurance company filed the Appeal before this Court and a learned single Judge in the said Appeal filed at the instance of the insurance company, even though an objection was raised as to the absence of the permission obtained by the insurance company to contest the quantum of compensation, did not accept the same and allowed the Appeal reducing the compensation to Rs.40,800/-. Hence, the present Appeal. The only point, which arises for consideration, is whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and especially in the absence of the permission being obtained as contemplated under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the Appeal at the instance of the insurance company is maintainable and whether it is entitled to contest the quantum of compensation as determined? The aforesaid question is no longer res integra as a Full Bench of the Supreme Court in NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, CHANDIGARH v. NICOLLETTA ROHTAGI AND ORS. [1], held that without permission being obtained, the insurance company is not entitled and has no right to contest the quantum of compensation. Following the same, the Appeal is allowed. The order passed by the learned single Judge in A.A.O.no.1126 of 1992, dated 30-06- 1998 is set aside. Consequently, it is held that the compensation as determined and fixed by the Tribunal at Rs.81,240/- stands restored, along with interest as awarded. No order as to costs. _________________ B. PRAKASH RAO, J __________________ P. DURGA PRASAD, J Date: 08-02-2011 YCR [1] 2002 (6) ALT 43 (SC)