IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMPMO No.208 of 2022 Decided on 04th September, 2025 National Insurance Company …Petitioner Versus Learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal and others …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Bhupinder Pathania, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Karan Singh Kanwar, Advocate, for respondents No.2 to 8. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has assailed order dated 05.11.2018, passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Sirmour, District at Nahan, H.P., which reads as under:- “The payment is not being made despite of time granted again and again. It appears that the National Insurance company is not willing to make the payment. Hence, this Court is left with no other option to issue certification under Section 174 of Motor Vehicles Act for recovery of the left out amount of Rs.1,46,945/-. Let 2 certificate under Section 174 of the M.V. Act be issued to the concerned Collector so that amount could be recovered as arrears of land revenue. The petition is accordingly disposed of. The file after due completion be consigned to record room.” 2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court does not find any infirmity in the order for the reason that no TDS is to be deducted from the amount which is awarded in favour of a party in a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The compensation awarded to a party in lieu of the death of their predecessor cannot be stricto sensu termed to be income on which tax is payable. Leaned counsel for the petitioner submits that as the TDS already stands paid by the Insurance Company, therefore, the right of the Insurance Company to recover the same from the Tax Department be reserved. 3. In light of the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, these proceedings are closed without interfering with the order passed by the learned Tribunal but with the observation that the petitioner shall be at liberty to recover the 3 amount from the Tax Department, as the same, but natural, has been erroneously deducted and paid to the Tax Department. 4. The petition is disposed of. The amount which has been deposited by the petitioner in this Court, which otherwise is payable to the respondent/claimant is ordered to be released in favour of the respondent/claimant on the Bank account, details whereof, be furnished by the learned counsel to the Registry within a period of one week from today. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge September 04, 2025 (Vinod)