RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

                           Ananchi

                           Vs.

                           Ram Chandra

Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1530 of 2000
     (Mrs. Gyan Sudha Misra, J.)

                           07.02.2002

                           JUDGEMENT

Mrs. Gyan Sudha Misra, J.

1. The appellants-herein are the claimants who have been awarded a sum of Rs.
1,70,000/- (Rs. One lac seventy thousand) on account of death of the husband of
respondent No. 1 Ananchi in a motor accident. While the matter was pending before
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Sikar, Lok Adalat was held on 6-5-1999 and
the appellants and the Insurance Company entered into a compromise by which an
amount of Rs. 1,70,000/- (Rs. One Lac seventy thousand) was accepted by the
appellants as a reasonable amount towards compensation.

2. One would have thought that the matter finally came to an end in regard to this
claim case but it appears that the appellants-claimants gave a second thought
regarding the amount of compensation and preferred to file an appeal before this Court
in the year 2000, curiously after more than a year since the appellants appear to have
given a second thought about the amount of compensation. Hence an appeal against
the aforesaid award which had been arrived after a compromise was filed, raising a
ground that the interest on the said amount has not been awarded to them. The action
of the appellants in filing the appeal in my opinion is clearly beyond their legal
entitlement for once they have compromised the dispute before the Lok Adalat without
any undue influence and pressure, it is not open for them to challenge it by way of
filing an appeal after more than a period of one year.
3. The counsel for the appellant Mr. Anoop Dhand however, sought to draw a
distinction between the main award and the ground of interest which has been claimed
by the appellants. But even he had to agree to the extent that once the amount of
compensation has been determined in the Lok Adalat, the appeal against it would not
be maintainable for claimants are expected to enter into a compromise after full
deliberation on its consequences and is expected to look into its implications and
ramifications before leaping into it. However, the counsel of the appellant contended
that the amount of interest was open to challenge by way of an appeal, as the question
of interest on the award was not compromised. This argument, in my view, is
absolutely devoid of substance as the award of compensation along with interest is a
compensate award and it is difficult to accept the argument that even though the
amount of compensation was compromised in Lok Adalat, the interest on the said
amount was open to challenge by way of an appeal for it cannot be held that the claim
of interest on the amount of compensation was an independent cause of action for the
claimant to challenge it by way of a separate appeal. The amount of compensation
determined and the interest claimed which culminates into an award , is obviously a
part and parcel of the same claim and cause of action and once the principal amount of
compensation is accepted by way of a compromise before Lok Adalat, the question of
interest cannot be allowed to be reopened by way of an appeal for the claimant was
legally bound to raise it in the same proceeding before the Lok Adalat. That having
not been done, it cannot be allowed to be challenged by way to an independent appeal
and that too at such a belated stage after more than a period of one and a half year.
This is clearly an afterthought on the part of the appellants which cannot be permitted
to be raised. The appeal thus has no merit and hence it stands dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.