Orissa High Court
The Manager vs Jitendra Panigrahi And Another on 7 April, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.658 of 2020
The Manager, Legal Cell, .... Appellant
M/s.The National Insurance Co. Ltd.
Mr.N.K.Mohanty, Advocate
-versus-
Jitendra Panigrahi and another .... Respondents
Mr.L.M.Nanda, Advocate for Respondent No.1
CORAM:
JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
7.4.2022
Order No.
3. 1. Heard Mr.Mohanty, learned counsel for the Appellant and
Mr.Nanda, learned counsel for the claimant-Respondent No.1.
2. Present appeal by the Insurer is directed against the judgment
dated 13th March, 2020 passed by learned 1st M.A.C.T.,
Jagatsinghpur in Motor Accident Claim Case No.233 of 2016,
wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.2,70,700/- has been
granted along with interest @ 7% per annum with effect from the
date of filing of the claim application on account of injuries
sustained by the claimant in the motor vehicular accident dated
25th March, 2014.
3. The case of the claimant is that he was a Manson in avocation
and met with the accident on 25th March, 2014 while returning to
his residence. Negligence on the part of the driver of the
offending vehicle is not disputed by the parties. The only
challenge is with respect to quantum of compensation.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the Appellant that while granting
compensation, the amount under the head of future loss of
income to the tune of Rs.97,000/- has been counted mistakenly
without any proof towards disability.
5. Mr.Nanda, learned counsel for claimant-Respondent No.1
submits in reply that, the disability to the extent of 10% counted
by the Tribunal is a normal presumption for which no evidence is
required to be proved keeping in view the nature of injuries.
6. It reveals that the injuries are fracture of tibia and fibula of
the left leg as per the injury report. The Appellant has undergone
treatment as an indoor patient from 25th March, 2014 to 6th April,
2014. Admittedly, no document has been produced to satisfy the
disability up-to 10% nor any opinion of the doctor has been
brought on record in this respect. The Tribunal has held that, the
claimant might not be able to do his physical work with same
previous strength because of the fractures in his left leg, and on
that score granted Rs.97,200/- by applying multiplier 18 and by
counting income @Rs.4,500/- per month. This assumption of loss
of future income by the Tribunal in absence of any material
brought on record is not found justified. Keeping in view the
nature of injuries, which are fracture of tibia and fibula of his left
leg and the period he underwent treatment as an indoor patient,
such an assumption with regard to future loss of income is
unsustainable. As such the amount granted towards the same is
liable to be deducted from the total amount. Accordingly, the
compensation amount is modified to Rs.1,72,800/-, rounded to
Rs.1,73,000/-. The other heads of compensation counted by the
Tribunal being found justified are not interfered with.
7. In the result, the Insurer-Appellant is directed to deposit
Rs.1,73,000/-(One lakh seventy three thousand) before the
Tribunal along with interest @6% per annum from the date of
filing of the claim application within a period of two months from
today; where-after the same shall be disbursed in favour of the
claimant on same terms and proportion as directed by the
Tribunal.
8. With aforesaid modification in the compensation amount, the
appeal is disposed of.
9. The statutory deposit made by the Appellant with accrued
interest thereon be refunded to him on proper application and on
production of proof of deposit of the award amount before the
learned Tribunal.
10. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
CRBiswal
