SADHANA LODH versus NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANR.

Citation: [2003] 1 S.C.R. 567 · Decided: 24-01-2003 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.N. KHARE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Cited by 4 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

SADHANA LODH 
v. 
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANR. 
JANUARY 24, 2003 
(V.N. KHARE, CJ!, S.B. SINHA AND DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, 1950; Articles 226 and 227/Motor Vehicles Ac( 
1988; Section 149(2) and 173: 
A 
B 
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded compensation to claimant C 
under Motor Vehicles Act-Writ Petition dismissed by Single Judge-Allowing 
the writ appeal Division Bench reduced compensation amount-Maintainability 
of writ petition by the High Court-Challenge of-Held, where statutory right 
to file an appeal is available under law, it is not open to High Court to 
entertain a petition under Article 227 nor can it enlarge the limited grounds D 
of challenge available under the Statute-Where statute neither provides for 
remedy of filing an appeal nor remedy of filing revision, petition under Article 
227 would lie-Supervisory jurisdiction of High Court cannot be extended to 
correct an error of law-Civil Procedure Code, 1908; Section 115-Practice 
and Procedure. 
E 
Son of the claimant-appellant died in a motor vehicle accident. 
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded compensation. Aggrieved, 
Insurer filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution 
of India. Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the same. Allowing 
the writ appeal, Division Bench of High Court reduced the compensation 
amount. Hence the present appeal. 
F 
It was contended for the appellant that since remedy by way of 
appeal against the award of the Tribunal was available to insurer under 
Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, writ petition under Articles 226-
227 was not maintainable and the petition ought not to have been G 
entertained by the High Court. 
On .behalf of Insurer it was submitted that since limited grounds are 
available to insurer under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, it is open 
to an insurer to file writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the 
Constitution of India. 
567 
H 
A 
568 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS .. 
[2003) 1 S,C.R. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. In a situation where there is a cbliusio~ between the 
claimant and the insured or the insured does ·not ci~mtest t.he claim and 
further if the Tribunal does not implead th.e insurance company 'to contest 
the claim, it is open to an insurer to seek permi~sion ofthe Tribunal to 
B contest the claim on~the ground available to the insured or to.a person 
against whom a claim has Peen made. If permission is granted and the 
+ 
insurer is allowed to contesMhe claim on !llerit, in that case it is open to 
the insurer to file an appeal against the award or the Tribunal OD merits. 
Thus, in such a situation, the. insurer can question t~e quantum· of 
C compensatiOn awarded by the Tribunal. (570-C, D.l 
1.2. The right of appeal is a statutory right and where the. law 
provides remedy by filing an appeal; may be on limited grounds, the 
.X 
grounds of challenge cannot be enlarged by filing a petition under Article · 
2261227 of the Constitution. on the premise that the insurer has limited .. 
D grounds available for challenging the award given by the Tribunal Section 
149 (2) of the Act limits the insurer to file an appeal on those enumerated 
grounds and the appeal being a product of the statute it is not open to an 
insurer to take any plea other than those provided under Section 149(2) 
of the Act. (570-F) 
~ 
E 
National Insurance Co. Ltd, Chandigarh v. Nico//etta R.ohtagi .& Ors., 
(2002) 7 sec 456, relied on. 
. 
. 
1.3. The petition filed under Article 227 of the Cons•itution by the 
insurer was wholly misconceived. Where a statutory right to file ail appeal 
.F 
has been prov.idedfor, it is not open to High Court to entertain a petition 
uncler ArtiCle 221 of the Constitution. Where a remedy by way of an appeal 
,...i.._ 
has not been provided for against the order and .judgment of a District 
Judge, the. remedy available to the aggrieved person is to file a revision 
before the High Court under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 
Where remedy for filing a revision before the High Court under Section 
G l 15 of CPC has been expressly barred by a State enactment, only in such 
c•se a petition under Artide 227 of the Constitution would lie and not 
under Article 226 of the Constitution. [570-G, H; 571-D] 
1.4. The supervisory jurisdiction conferred on the High Courts under 
Article 227 of the Constitution is confined only to see whether an inferior 
H Court or Tribunal has proceeded
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.