Appeals

Sec. 170 -No permission sought before the MACT for contesting the case on grounds other than those specified under Sec. 149(2) - Contention in that there is a reservation clause in the agreement authorising the insurance company to raise all contentions that could be raised by the insured - Insurance company must plead about it in the written statement - No such plea in the High Court is permissible. [New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs V.C.Ramachandran 2001 (2) KLJ 477 = ILR 2001 (3) Kerala. Dated 19th September, 2001. V.P.Mohan Kumar & R.Rajendra Babu (JJ)]

Sec.173 (2) – Specific bar under the statute , for filing appeal if the amount in dispute is less than Rs.10,000. The intention of the Parliament is that if the award is less than the specified amount , it shall not be challenged and it should be paid .The Insurance company cannot invoke Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India , bye-passing the specific provision.[ Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. M.A.C.T & Ors. 1999 (2) KLJ 500 J.B.Koshy J. ]

Sec. 173 - Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules - 396 (2) - Common award in three claims - Appeal filed with one award - Another appellant cannot take advantage of the same and file appeal without the copy of the award . Petition to dispense with certified copy of the impugned award dismissed . [ Seena vs The Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. 2001 (3) KLT 695 = 2001 (2) KLJ 620=ILR 2001(3) Ker 481. P.K.Balasubramnayan & K.A.Abdul Gafoor (JJ)]

Sec.173 - As a preposition of law we would hold that a person who has failed to challenge a finding entered against him in a prior proceeding in which the question was heard and finally decided and thus allowed the finding to become final and binding between the parties shall be deemed to have accepted the finding and such a person cannot in another proceeding be heard to challenge that finding once conclusively decided. There cannot be a conflicting finding on the same fact, viz. the extent of liability under the policy. A party against whom an adverse finding is recorded has got a right of appeal and since we are not taken through the appellant/insurance company having paid the amounts to the claimants under the insurance policy declared by court to be one of unlimited third party risk coverage must be deemed to have accepted the nature of the policy as declared by the Tribunal and they cannot now turn round and blow hot and cold. Issue agitated in these appeals is clearly barred by res-judicata. [The Branch Manager v. R. Gopalakrishnan Nair. M.F.A.No.737 of 1991, dated 7-10-1999. K. Narayana Kurup & T.M. Hassan Pillai, JJ.]

Sec.173 - The appeal by any person who is liable to pay any amount in terms of the award shall not be entertained by the High Court unless he has deposited the amount as provided by the 1st proviso of Sec.173. The right of appeal is not a a vested right or a constitutional right, but a creature of a statute. The legislature while creating a right of appeal can impose conditions for the entertainability of the appeal. [Vadakkekkara Baby @ Devassia v. Chakkummuttil Shyni, M.F.A.No. 577 of 1994, dated 21-01-2000. K. Narayana Kurup & T.M. Hassan Pillai (JJ)]