1 FA 3192.2007 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 3192 OF 2007 Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr.R.V.Gore, Advocate for the appellant Mr. A.S.Deshpande, Advocate for the resp.no.1 Mr. M.K.Deshpande & Mr. S.A.Sable Advocates for the resp.no.2 Mr.A.B.Gatne, Advocate for resp. no. 3 .......................... CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 25/04/2011 PER COURT : 1. The Appeal is by the owner of the vehicle. The claim of the present respondents was allowed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Aurangabad vide its Judgment and Award dated 6/7/2009, wherein compensation of Rs. 41,000/­ with further interest @ 9 % per annum was awarded to the claimants. Aggrieved thereby, the owner has approached this Court. 2 FA 3192.2007 2. Mr. R.V.Gore, the learned counsel for the appellant vehemently submits that the Tribunal should have seen the bonafides of the present appellant. No sooner the Award was passed, the appellant has deposited the amount under the Award. In such circumstances, the Tribunal ought not to have awarded interest on the same. The learned counsel further contends that in fact it was the claimants, who had protracted the litigation in as much as in the year 2007 the petition was dismissed. The claimants preferred Appeal and the appellate Court remanded the matter back to the Tribunal, for which the present appellant is not responsible. The appellant would not be liable to pay the amount of interest for such period. 3. Mr. Gore, the learned counsel for the appellant relies on the Judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 22/11/2007 delivered in First Appeal No. 258 of 2006 at its Bench at Nagpur to butress his submission. 4. Per contra, Mr. A.S.Deshpande, the learned counsel for the claimants submits that the interest would follow the cause. There is no lapse on the part of the claimants. In fact, the Tribunal should have awarded interest from the date of presentation of the petition. It would not be the 3 FA 3192.2007 fault on the part of the claimants for non registration of the claim petition prior to 1998. The learned counsel contends that in the year 2001, the claim petition was allowed. The owner thereafter on 29/8/2002 filed an application for setting aside exparte Award with an application for condonation of delay of 257 days. The same was allowed on 24/2/2006. Thereafter the claim petition was dismissed by the Tribunal on the ground that the claimants have not complied Rule 254 (5) of the Motor Vehicles Rules. The claimants had preferred Appeal to this Court and this Court remanded the matter back for fresh enquiry holding that the same is not mandatory and the non compliance of the same did not entail the dismissal of the claim petition and thereafter the same was allowed. As such, the discretion has been properly exercised by the Tribunal. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties at length. 6. The pendente lite interest is governed by Section 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure. No doubt, it is the discretion of the Court in awarding the pendente lite interest, but the said discretion is based on judicial norms and legal principles and is not an unregulated discretion. When the Court 4 FA 3192.2007 has found the claimants to be entitled to the amount, then the interest would follow the cause in as much as the claimants have been deprived of the use and enjoyment of the said amount for the period from which they are entitled to till the period they are compensated. The claim has been allowed, it has been held that as on the date of the accident, the claimants would be entitled for the amount of Rs. 41,000/­. The perusal of the proceedings shows that the delay in dismissal of the proceedings can not be attributed to the claimants. May be after the Award was passed, the owner has deposited the amount, that would no doubt show bonafide on his part, but the said bonafide is not referable to the date of the petition. The same is after the Award has been passed by the Tribunal. 7. The Judgment relied by Mr. Gore, the learned counsel for the appellant in F.A. No. 258 of 2006 referred supra will not come to the aid of the appellant in view of the fact that no serious lapses can be attributed to the claimants. 8. In light of the above, when there are no lapses on the part of the claimants in conducting the proceedings nor it can be said that the proceedings were protracted by the claimants, in 5 FA 3192.2007 such circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere in the discretion that has been exercised by the Tribunal in awarding the interest amount. The interest amount which is awarded is also not at exorbitant rate but it is @ 9 % per annum. The same would be payable till the amount awarded is deposited. 9. In light of the above, the First Appeal is disposed of however with no order as to costs. 10. In view of disposal of First Appeal, the Civil Application is also disposed of. [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J. ] KNP/FA 3192.2007