Orissa High Court
The Oriental Insurance Company vs Sri Bhabani Shankar Nayak And on 16 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.498 of 2018
The Oriental Insurance Company .... Appellant
Limited
Mr. M.C. Nayak, Advocate
-versus-
Sri Bhabani Shankar Nayak and .... Respondents
another
Mr. A. Routray, Advocate for Respondent No.1
CORAM:
JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
16.11.2021
Order No.
05. 1. On the consent of both the parties, the matter is taken up for
hearing.
2. Heard Mr. M.C. Nayak, learned counsel for the Appellant-
Insurance Company as well as Mr. A. Routray, learned counsel
for the Respondent No.1-claimant.
3. The present appeal has been directed against the impugned
judgment dated 03.01.2018 of the learned 3rd MACT, Bhadrak in
MAC No.57 of 2011. The learned Tribunal has directed for
payment of compensation of Rs.34,98,326/- along with interest @
7% per annum from 19.7.2011 to the claimant.
4. Mr. M.C. Nayak, learned counsel for the Appellant submits
that despite the fact that the claimant has produced the IT
documents in support of his income, which reveals that he along
with his two brothers was doing the business as proprietors of
Bharati Plumbing and Sanitary Works at Banagalore, learned
Tribunal has failed to consider the significant contribution of
other two brothers of the claimant in the business. Even without
participation of the claimant after the accident, their business
flourished more. In other words, the contention of the Appellant
is that even if the claimant is incapacitated to contribute towards
the business still the income of Bharati Plumbing and Sanitary
Works was not reduced for which it is not correct to say that the
claimant has sustained any loss of future income.
5. I fail to conceive the reasons adduced by the claimant. When
the IT documents in respect of the income of the claimant is not
disputed, it would be improper to presume that the claimant had
no contribution to the business since the business has flourished
more even in his absence. The said argument is without logic and
therefore rejected.
6. On the other hand, the claimant-Respondent in the connected
appeal has prayed for enhancement of the amount towards future
loss of income on the ground that he had major share of income
in the business for his consistent support and contribution,
whereas his two brothers were helping hands only. In absence of
substantial proof on this aspect, this argument of the claimant is
rejected because when three partners are there on record,
admittedly the profit earned from the business entity has to be
shared equally between those three partners. This is the essence
of reasons discussed by the learned Tribunal who accordingly has
arrived the monthly income of the claimant at Rs.20,000/-.
7. The determination of the learned Tribunal towards the income
of the claimant is founded without fault. In addition to the loss of
future income, the learned Tribunal has also granted sufficient
amount towards medical expenses, purchase of medicines and
other charges based on the documents produced before him. So
here also no fault is noticed on the part of the learned Tribunal.
Needless to say that the total amount thus calculated by the
learned Tribunal came to Rs.34,98,326/- which has been
accordingly directed to be paid by the Insurance Company.
8. Thus no merit is seen in the challenge by the insurer and the
appeal is dismissed.
9. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire award
amount along with interest before the learned Tribunal within a
period of eight weeks from today; where-after the same shall be
disbursed to the claimant on the same proportion and terms as
directed by the learned Tribunal.
10. On deposit of the award amount before the learned Tribunal
and filing of a receipt evidencing the deposit with a refund
application before this Court, the statutory deposit made before
this Court with accrued interest thereon shall be refunded to the
Appellant-Insurance Company.
11. The MACA is disposed of.
12. An urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
B.K. Barik
