Orissa High Court
The Divisional Manager vs Sradhanjali Mohapatra And Others on 25 July, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.1288 of 2015
The Divisional Manager, Oriental
Insurance Company Ltd. .... Appellant
Mr. G.P. Dutta, Advocate
-versus-
Sradhanjali Mohapatra and Others .... Respondents
Mr. Manas Pati, Advocate for Respondents 1-3
CORAM:
SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
25.7.2022
Order No.
15. 1. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel for the insurer -
Appellant and Mr. M. Pati, learned counsel for claimant -
Respondents.
3. Present appeal by the insurer is directed against impugned
judgment dated 20th April, 2015 of learned 4th MACT, Puri passed in
MAC No.154 of 2000 wherein compensation to the tune of
Rs.4,34,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of
filing of the claim application, i.e. 4th April, 2000 has been granted on
account of death of the deceased in the motor vehicular accident dated
19th February, 2000.
4. Mr. Dutta, learned counsel submits on behalf of the insurer that
the learned tribunal ignoring all such facts regarding non-availability
of the insurance policy and valid driving licence of the driver, has
directed present Appellant - insurer to indemnify the compensation
amount on behalf of the owner. It is further submitted that despite the
affidavit of the Deputy Manager dated 17th April, 2015 filed in the
claim application and the copy of driving licence revealing validity of
the same till 11th March, 1999, and the concerned seizure lists which
were marked as Ext.A and Ext.B by subsequent order of the tribunal
dated 21st September, 2015, those were not taken into consideration
by the tribunal.
5. Upon hearing Mr. Pati, learned counsel for the claimant -
Respondents and perusal of the impugned judgment reveals that under
Issue No.IV at paragraph 7 of the impugned judgment, the learned
tribunal, without any discussion, has held that so far liability is
concerned there is no violation of policy and then straightway fixed
the liability on the insurer. Admittedly, it is the specific case of the
insurer that the cover note seized by police in respect of the offending
vehicle, i.e. NL-05-A-7671 is a fake one and the certificate of
insurance bearing number 324297564 as mentioned in the seizure list
is also fake. Besides the same, the specific averment made in the
affidavit dated 17th April, 2015 is also to the effect that the driver had
no valid driving licence on the date of accident and the DL lapsed on
11th March, 1999. Despite all such averments made by the insurer it is
seen that the tribunal without making any discussions specifically on
the validity and genuineness of the alleged insurance policy, has in a
cryptic manner said that there is no violation of policy and in the
ordering portion fixed the liability on the insurer.
6. As per copy of affidavit dated 17th April, 2015 and the certified
copy of order dated 21st September, 2015, furnished by Mr. Dutta in
court which are kept on record, this court is satisfied that the
offending vehicle was not having a valid insurance policy on the date
of accident. Accordingly, it is concluded that in absence of a valid
policy, no liability can be saddled on the insurer.
7. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the insurer - Appellant
is exonerated from its liability. However, it is open for the claimants
to realize the compensation amount from the owner.
8. The statutory deposit made by the appellant before this court
along with accrued interest be refunded to the Appellant - insurer on
proper application.
9. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
M.K.Panda
