Orissa High Court
National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Kundia [email protected] Sardar And on 14 February, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.644 of 2020
National Insurance Co. Ltd. .... Appellant
Mr. S.R. Pattanaik, Advocate
-versus-
Kundia [email protected] Sardar and .... Respondents
others
Mr. B.N. Rath, Advocate for Respondent Nod.1 to 3
CORAM:
JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
14.02.2022
Order No.
04. 1. Heard Mr. S.R. Pattanaik, learned counsel for the Appellant-
Insurance Company as well as Mr. B.N. Rath, learned counsel for
the Respondent Nos.1 to 3-claimants.
2. Present appeal by the insurer is directed against the judgment
dated 25.01.2020 of the learned IIIrd MACT, Rairangpur in
MACA No.08 of 2016 wherein compensation to the tune of
Rs.7,70,056/- along with interest @6% per annum from the date
of filing of the claim application, i.e.,10.02.2016 was granted by
the learned Tribunal to the claimants on account of death of the
deceased in a motor vehicular accident dated 31.01.2016.
3. Mr. S.R. Pattanaik, learned counsel for the Appellant-Insurance
Company submits that though the driver had no valid driving
license, learned Tribunal has failed to notice the same. Secondly,
he submits that the compensation is faulty one as the age of the
deceased has not been properly determined to fix the multiplier.
As per his submission, no bone test of the deceased has been
conducted to determine the right age of the deceased and only on
the basis of age mentioned in the post mortem report, the
multiplier has been fixed.
4. Having heard both parties, it reveals from the impugned
judgment that the learned Tribunal under Issue No.3 has
answered the question about driving license of the driver of the
offending vehicle. Learned Tribunal has observed that though no
driving license has been seized by the Police, but in absence of
submission of charge-sheet for offence under Sec.181 of the M.V.
Act, it can be presumed that the driver had the valid license. It
needs to mention here that concerning the accident, the charge-
sheet for the offences under Secs.279/304-A, I.P.C. only has been
submitted in connection with Bahalda P.S. Case No.6 dated
31.01.2016. Admittedly the insurer-Appellant has not adduced
any evidence nor produced any material to dispute valid holding
of license by the driver. Thus no infirmity is found in the
conclusion of the learned Tribunal with regard to valid holding of
license by the driver and consequent liability of the insurer to
indemnify the owner.
5. So far as the submissions put-forth by Mr. Pattanaik with
regard to determination of the age of the deceased, the approach
of the learned Tribunal based on the recording of the post mortem
report is found quite justified and such contentions of Mr.
Pattanaik is rejected out-right being without any substance.
6. Accordingly, the amount of compensation as granted by the
learned Tribunal along with the findings rendered in the judgment
is confirmed. The appeal is dismissed.
7. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire
amount of Rs.7,70,056/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Seventy Thousand
Fifty-six only) along with interest @6% per annum from the date
of filing of the claim application i.e.10.2.2016 before the learned
Tribunal within a period of four weeks from today; where-after
the same shall be disbursed in favour of the claimants in such
terms and proportion as directed in the impugned judgment.
8. 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.
9. An urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
B.K. Barik
