4 The learned Single judge of the High Court has rejected the same by judgment dated 15.1.2010 giving rise to the instant appeal.
In the meanwhile, the petitioner challenged the award passed by the Tribunal under Section 163A of the Act by filing First Appeal No.3019 of 2007.
The Tribunal by an order dated 23.12.2005 permitted the respondents to proceed with the petition filed under Section 166 of the Act.
This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 15.1.2010 rendered by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Special Civil Application No.9400 of 2006 by which the order dated 23.12.2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal MACT Bhuj, Kachchh in M.A.C.P. No.759/97 permitting the respondents, who had already obtained companypensation under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 the Act for short , to proceed with the application filed under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, is affirmed.
This Court has heard the learned companynsel for the parties.
Kanji Keshavbhai Gadhvi was riding his two wheeler i.e. Luna.
The present petitioner filed an application with a prayer that the application filed under Section 166 which was pending be rejected in view of the decision of this Court in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.
The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner had deposited the said amount and the respondents have already withdrawn and invested the amount of companypensation as directed by the Tribunal.
Therefore, the respondents who are legal heirs of the deceased respondent filed MACP No.759 of 1997 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the driver and owner of the taxi as well as against the petitioner who is insurer of the taxi and claimed companypensation of Rs.7,50,000/ .
The Tribunal also directed that amount already disbursed in favour of the respondents and invested by them, pursuant to the award made under Section 163A shall be adjusted to the final award to be passed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
When he reached near IFFCO, the driver of taxi bearing No.
Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner preferred Special Civil Application No.9400 of 2006 before the High Court.
Leave granted.
3 The Tribunal by order dated 25.6.2002 granted stay of further proceedings of the petition filed under Section 166 of the Act till further orders.
GJ 12 C 9484 who was companying from the opposite direction dashed the 2 taxi with the Luna as result of which Kanjibhai lost his life.
The appeal was dismissed on the ground of delay.
The respondents thereafter filed an application with a prayer that they be permitted to proceed with the petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act and they were ready to give undertaking to give credit of the amount awarded to them as companypensation in the claim petition filed under Section 163A of the Act.
