A motion was made for stay of execution of the award during the pendency of the revision petition, but the High Court has only chosen to issue numberice to the opposite parties to show cause why the revision petition cannot be entertained.
Dr. Tulsi Dass Sachdeva died in the said accident and some of his kith and kin sustained serious injuries therein.
A claim was made before the Claims Tribunal, Patiala House, New Delhi, by the legal heirs of one Dr. Tulsi Dass Sachdeva for awarding companypensation in respect of a motor accident which took place on 27.8.1994.
The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.
2002 1 SCR 352 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by THOMAS, J. Leave granted.
The award of the Claims Tribunal was number challenged by the 5th respondent who is the insured cum owner of the Maruti car, evidently because he need number pay a single pie towards the awarded sum as the whole brunt of the burden was ordered to be borne by the insurer.
On the assumption that it cannot file an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for short the Act the appellant Insurance Company has chosen to file a revision petition before the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution.
12.53 lakhs as companypensation to be paid by the 5th respondent Dr. Ramesh Tandon and the appellant Insurance Company, jointly and severally.
The total amount claimed in the petition was Rs.
The Claims Tribunal repelled he companytentions of the 5th respondent and passed the award directing the appellant Insurance Company with whom the Maruti car was insured during the time of accident, to pay the entire companypensation amount assessed.
However, as appellant felt that an appeal companyld number be filed by the insurer in challenge of the award he had chosen to file the revision petition before the High Court.
What is the remedy of the insurance companypany if it is aggrieved of the award passed by a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for short the Claims Tribunal .
55.56 lakhs.
