Jharkhand High Court
Gautam Kumar Banarjee vs Dr. C. P. Vidyarthi & Anr on 6 April, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
[Civil Miscellaneous Appellate Jurisdiction]
M.A. No. 225 of 2018
Gautam Kumar Banarjee .... .. ... Appellant(s)
Versus
Dr. C. P. Vidyarthi & Anr. .. ... ... Respondent(s)
...........
CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
(Through :-Video Conferencing)
.........
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Rajiv Kr. Karn, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) :
..........
04 / 06.04.2021. Heard, learned counsel, Mr. Rajiv Kr. Karn on the instruction of learned
counsel for the appellant, Mr. M. B. Lal.
The instant Misc. Appeal has been preferred by the injured /claimant for
enhancement of the Award dated 14.12.2017 passed by learned District Judge-VII-
cum MACT Judge, Dhanbad in Motor Accident Claim Case No.04/2004, whereby
claimant/injured, Gautam Kumar Banarjee has been allowed compensation to the
tune of Rs.8,16,492/- along with interest @6% per annum, but the interest shall not
be payable from 26.02.2015 till 18.01.2017 as the claim application was filed on
05.01.2004 which was dismissed for default on 26.02.2015 and the same was
restored on 18.01.2017, as such, interest has only been granted from 05.01.2004 to
25.02.2015 and thereafter from 18.01.2017 @6% per annum. It was also clarified
that if any amount awarded and paid to plaintiff/claimant under the provision of
Section 140 M.V. Act as ad-interim compensation which shall be deducted from the
awarded compensation amount to plaintiffs/claimants. However, the right of recovery
has been given in favour of the National Insurance Company Limited to recover the
same from the owner of the offending vehicle.
Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that there is delay of
20 days in preferring the appeal and for condonation of the same, I.A. No.5550 of
2018 has been preferred.
Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that injured/claimant,
Gautam Kumar Banarjee has suffered 48% physical disability but the learned
Tribunal has only granted under the heading of special diet to the tune of Rs.10,000/-
which is a meager amount, as the appellant being an Advocate has suffered for one
and half months under Indoor and Outdoor treatment.
Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the learned
Tribunal has also granted less amount under the heading of pain and sufferings. As
such, notice may be issued to the respondents. As such, notice may be issued to the
owner of the offending vehicle as well as to the Insurance Company as there is every
likelihood of enhancement of the compensation amount.
Considering the same, let notice be issued to the respondent No.1 [Dr. C. P.
Vidyarthi, S/o Late J. Prasad, Resident of Saraidhela, P.O. & P.S. Saraidhela,
District- Dhanbad (Owner of Maruti Car No.WB-38L/4383] in both, memo of
appeal and in limitation matter under both process i.e. under Registered Cover with
A/D as well as under Ordinary process, for which, requisites etc., must be filed
within two weeks.
Learned counsel for the appellant is directed to serve two copies of memo of
appeal, impugned judgment along with all relevant documents including the
interlocutory application at the earliest upon the counsel for the respondent No.2, Mr.
Manish Kumar who normally appears for the National Insurance Company L.T.D.
It is made clear that while considering the interest, the claimant shall not be
entitled for any interest after 90 days of the Award dated 14.12.2017 till today when
the copy of appeal and other relevant documents are being served upon learned
counsel, Mr. Manish Kumar.
Put up this case on the same date when other cases having similar issue have
to be listed.
The appellant is also at liberty to serve personal service of notice upon
respondent No.1 [Dr. C. P. Vidyarthi, S/o Late J. Prasad, Resident of Saraidhela,
P.O. & P.S. Saraidhela, District- Dhanbad (Owner of Maruti Car No.WB-
38L/4383] and file an affidavit to that effect before this Court.
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
Sandeep/
