Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Future Generali India Insurance ... vs Soumita Roy on 31 October, 2023
Author: Hima Kohli
Bench: Hima Kohli
ITEM NO.18 COURT NO.13 SECTION XVI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 24644-
24645/2023 (@ Diary no. 34368/2019)
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 26-02-2019
in CO No. 2475/2018 and 05-01-2018 in FMAT No. 419/2017 passed by
the High Court At Calcutta)
FUTURE GENERALI INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. PETITIONER
VERSUS
SOUMITA ROY & ANR. RESPONDENTS
(IA No. 160189/2019 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING)
Date : 31-10-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Navneet Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Antarik Chakrabarti, Adv.
Mr. Ashwary Kathed, Adv.
Mr. Parijat Kishore, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Rabin Majumder, Adv.
Ms. Akansha Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Joydeep Mukherjee, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. Delay condoned.
2. The petitioner-Insurance company is aggrieved by the order dated 26 th February, 2019, passed by the High Court whereunder, a sum of ₹1,22,62,015/- (Rupees One Crore Twenty Two Lakh Sixty Two Thousand Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by POOJA SHARMA Date: 2023.11.22 15:31:33 IST Reason: 1 and Fifteen only) awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Alipur 1 in favour of the respondent no.1 along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum, from the date of filing of the claim petition till the realization was scaled down to ₹50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs) with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. A caveat was added by the High Court to the effect that in the event the petitioner does not deposit the aforesaid amount with interest within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment, the respondent no.1 shall be at liberty to initiate execution proceedings before the MACT for realization of the sum awarded, ‘as compensation by it’.
3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had defaulted in depositing the amount under the impugned judgment within the time granted. There was a delay of above six months in making compliances. As a result, the respondent no.1 filed an execution petition. Understanding the impugned judgment to mean that the sum awarded and payable by the petitioner to the respondent no.1 in the event of default would be the amount awarded by the MACT, the respondent no.1 filed an execution petition for the amount awarded by the MACT vide award dated 27th January, 2017. In the course of the execution petition, the bank accounts of the petitioner were attached for the amount due.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 22 nd May, 2018, the petitioner had paid a sum of ₹50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs) to the 1 For short the ‘MACT’ 2 respondent no.1 along with interest calculated at the rate of 6%, which came to ₹14,95,068/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakhs Ninety Five Thousand and Sixty Eight). Thereafter, pursuant to the attachment order, a further sum of ₹1,16,45,500/- (Rupees One Crore Sixteen lakhs Forty Five Thousand and Five Hundred) was released in favour of the respondent no.1 on 09 th April, 2019. In other words, the interest component alone paid to the respondent no.1 comes to ₹58,78,553/- (Rupees Fifty Eight Lakhs Seventy Eight Thousand Five Hundred Fifty Three).
5. We may add here that the respondent no.1 had filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for clarification of paragraph ‘53’ of the impugned judgment dated 26th February, 2017 and vide order dated 05th January, 2018, the clarification issued by the High Court was that the amount payable should be taken to be the amount as awarded by the MACT.
6. We have gone through the records and heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and are of the opinion that even if there was a delay on the part of the petitioner in releasing the sum of ₹50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs) as awarded by the High Court, the consequences thereof could not be so grave so as to revive the award dated 27th January, 2017, passed by the MACT in favour of the respondent no.1. At best, a reasonable rate of interest ought to have been awarded in favour of the respondent for the default on the part of the petitioner in 3 releasing the amount within the stipulated time.
7. In the interest of justice and to balance the equities, it is deemed appropriate to direct that besides the principal sum of ₹50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs) awarded by the High Court in favour of the respondent no.1, the respondent no.1 ought to be restituted with simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition, till 22nd May, 2018, the date on which a sum of ₹64,95,068/- (Rupees Sixty Four Lakhs Ninety Five Thousand and Sixty Eight) was released by the petitioner in his favour. After deducting the interest as directed above, the balance amount shall be paid back by the respondent no.1 to the petitioner – Insurance company. The said amount shall be deposited before the MACT within six weeks reckoned from today. The petitioner shall be at liberty to approach the MACT for seeking release of the said amount.
8. The petitions for Special Leave to Appeal are disposed of on the above terms.
(POOJA SHARMA) (NAND KISHOR)
COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
4