IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 2ND JANUARY 2009 / 12TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 36955 of 2008(Y) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP. 22 /2008 IN OPMV.136/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TIRUR .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------ THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD, THODUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. SANDHYA.G, D/O LATE GOPAKUMAR, AGED 27 YEASRS, RESIDING AT SANSAM, PANAKADU, VELIMUKKU.P.O, MUNNIYOOR VILLAGE, THIROORANGADI TALUK. 2. SWAPNA.G, D/O LATE GOPAKUMAR,AGED 24 YRS RESIDING AT SANSAM, PANAKADU, MUNNIYOOR VILLAGE, THIROORANGADI TALUK. 3. THE HON'BLE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TIRUR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 36955 OF 2008 (Y) ==================== Dated this the 2nd day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P8, an order passed by the MACT, Tirur in EP No.22/08 in OP(MV) No.136/02 directing the petitioner to pay further amounts mentioned therein. Ext.P1 is the award. Para 24 of the award reads as under. If the 3rd respondent fails to deposit the amount within a period of six months from today, the amount awarded as compensation will carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of realisation. 2. An appeal, as MACA 1902/06, was filed against the said award. The appeal was dismissed by Ext.P3 judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court. The Division Bench did not interfere with the interest as awarded in para 24 referred to above. Admittedly, the claim made by the claimant and the amount which is ordered to be paid by the impugned order, is the amount covered by para 24 of the award. The award thus having become final, the Insurance company is bound to pay the amount and therefore, the view taken by the Tribunal is unassailable. 3. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the award in so far as interest is awarded is without jurisdiction. He also placed reliance on the WPC 36955/08 :2 : judgment of the Apex Court in National Insurance Co.Ltd. v. Keshav Bahadur {2004(2) KLT S.N.Page No.26(Case No.33)}. In my view, the said judgment is not of any assistance to the petitioner so long as the award has become final as between the parties and remains binding even after a judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court. 4. If at all the petitioner was aggrieved, the petitioner ought to have got the interest awarded modified in the appeal. This having not been done, the petitioner is bound by para 24 of the award. In that view of the matter, the impugned order does not call for any interference. Writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp