Karnataka High Court
National Insurance Co.Ltd. vs Venkatalakshmamma on 12 August, 2010
Author: Jawad Rahim
Bench: Jawad Rahim
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Dated this the 12"' day of August, 2010:"~«:,.f"~«_:"'--.,A
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE' 3A.w;g\D_,
CIVIL REVISION PETITION:1N_Q,31E/2_!im . " A A
BETWEEN:
Nationai Insurance
Branch Office, '
Muddappa Shopping C,o.m,pi-ex,
1" Fioor, Vivek-ayrnandag Rear}, _
Tumkur by 3
Nationai Li1'SJn*ah"eve1V'_,C.o;-,_L;.i._I%r1~~§_tVe'ti.. '
Divis;onar':,),:=r:i._cs;-;,V , .r
No.16r,---K'umayrakrL;3,ea Ppad,
Ba ngaiore _ --" '5.60,__OQ%1 .- . .
(By sre, :3,Mahas,a,Aagjacate;
. _ _Venka{~a|akshmamma
' -- ,\.'r'r'.,{_Q- Ran'§;.a swamaia h,
A Age_d..a*bout 59 years,
iiamesh
" S/0 Rangaswamaiah,
A " Aged about 38 years,
Yathiraju
S/0 Rangaswamaiah,
Aged about 36 years,
...PETITIONER
All are Residing at Karikere,
Brahmasandra Post, Kora l-iobli,
Turnkur Taluk and District. ...RESPOjl\iD'El\lT_$
(By Sri. Bhushani Kumar, Advocate for Res.Apond:en't"
to 3)
This Civil Revision Petitéonjis fil:eCij.u'n_deAr'
of the Code of Civil Procedure,"=A19--08*'against theprder
dated 11.01.2010 on the application=-filedg.vur1d'er siectionfi
151 of Code of Civil Proce_d"u..re, 1908 by, t'n_e""~icourt of
Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Ei3vn) and ~.CJl~'i; Tiumkur in
Execution No.70? of 2008 pr_a\,Ii_ng_ t'o__call foihtihefrecords to
hear parties and allo*.r\r__4'tlf_ae R'evi_sion' _ora.yed for and etc,
This Civil Revisiwon Pet'i_tVio:n on for hearing
this day, the court madethe f.o!«l.ovvEng:«._
"Thi4s. re'.riVsi'o'i_'a._:is.._:iCii.re--cted against the order dated
22.1_2_.200'9 V_'rejVe';ctitn_gV"~'"the application filed by the
ju-olg~mg_e.nt«.debtoVr"'"e"Insurance Company and ordering
_ *issuan'ceiof*coercive process.
2. ."l+:i€ea::rd learned counsel on both sides.
'~ The undisputed facts are that the respondents
.h_er"ein succeeded in obtaining an award in their favour in ll'/lVC No.8"/5/1991, which was contested in Miscellaneous 5/ 3 First Appeal No.433/2002. While preferring Miscellaneous First Appeal, the Insurance Company had deposited a statutory amount of Rs.2S,000/--. However, after d'i'sposal of the Miscellaneous First Appeal, the award be executed before the triai court.
4. The insurance company dyepositt:-0"'t»-hleranriount as per award except Rs.25,0O0/--:1_wh:ich..3-d'ep'o's:i'ted=::;in appeal proceedings. This wlashinformed to vthe trial _<:ourt,t* The Insurance Company filed1a'n,::applica'tien_under Section 151 of the Code of CM; i>t'oce;ddre,j-isobs, requesting the lVlotor--.__Ac_cide'ri"tiClaim's._:Tvvri_b*tirial to recall the attachment warrant-it had".Vyde'p"c;s4i'ted Rs.2,98,873/-- vide cheque da'ted"ei.8.12;"2i§VO€'>, lRs.21,4oo/- vide cheque dated «2.sf2 2l"oio9T%"e.nd Rs.25,000/W in MFA l\io.433/2002. The .ie'a_rneLi7i%lein:;ber of the Tribunal rejected the application oniy on 'the ground that it was the responsibility of the V. u.Tnsura'r'ice Company to get the amount transmitted from ""..this'court' the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and delay in I\ W"
4--
this regard was attributable to them. Aggrieved by it, this revision is filed.
5. It is quite clear that the Insurance Compan'y had deposited Rs.25,000/-- in this court in which sum was ordered to be transferredV""t.o' Motorvl Accident Claims Tribunal Tiie.r:efof,?'}'V'V'the process of money transfer was. an adm,i."i;~.istrativ;e"'act.L between the courts. There""r4a:pipearsto deialylw in the amount reaching Motor"-~..Acci«dent Tribulnally. In the circumstances, when the-A-'ini'p'u:'gned._:lorder'_'.:.Nas passed, the TribunaMI"l'n'ot}i:eduItghatflthe arn._o"u"nt was not available. But, it cannot be att'r*ibuta4b_:ll'e..to the lapses on the part of the Insurance"€ornpa,nyA;--._ In thellrésult, the impugned order is set aside. It by now, the amount has already been 't.'.a'nsfe.rr'ed~_.'ito the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal concernied. If it is so, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Vwililjensure that the same is disbursed to the claimants in