Radhakrushna Mohanty And Others vs Mahammad Naseem Khan And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 3551 Ori

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                  MACA No.132 of 2021
                 Radhakrushna Mohanty and Others           ....         Appellants
                                                       Mr. L.M. Nanda, Advocate
                                            -versus-
                 Mahammad Naseem Khan and Anr.             ....       Respondents
                                  Mr. G.P. Dutta, Advocate for Respondent No.2

                           CORAM:
                           SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
                                         ORDER

28.7.2022 Order No.

07. 1. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Heard Mr. L.M. Nanda, learned counsel for the claimant - Appellants and Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel for insurer - Respondent No.2.

3. Since the claimants have prayed for enhancement of the compensation amount, the notice on Respondent No.1 - owner is dispensed with.

4. Present appeal by the claimants is directed against impugned judgment dated 15th December, 2020 of learned 1st MACT, Cuttack passed in MAC No.284 of 2016 wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.8,64,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 21st April, 2016 has been granted on account of death of the deceased in the motor vehicular accident dated 4th/5th June, 2013.

5. The main contention of the claimants for enhancement of the compensation amount is that, though the deceased was serving as I.T. Executive in a restaurant and getting salary of Rs.12,000/- per month but the tribunal, disbelieving such contention without valid reasons, has fixed his income at Rs.5000/- only without any reasonable basis.

6. Upon hearing Mr. Dutta, learned counsel for the insurer and to examine the contention of the claimants, it is seen from the impugned judgment that except so-called salary certificate under Ext.13 no other document has been proved with regard to such employment of the deceased as an I.T. Executive. At the same time, it is submitted on behalf of the claimants that the deceased was serving in a restaurant at Bhubaneswar in the brand name "Green Chilly".

7. Considering the nature of document marked under Ext.13 which is not supported with any authentic evidence, the same cannot be accepted conclusively to determine the salary of the deceased at Rs.12,000/- as mentioned therein. However, considering the nature of employment in a restaurant and his qualification of PGDCA as evinced from Ext.12, his income per month can be enhanced to Rs.6000/- against the assessment of the tribunal, keeping in view the prescribed rate of daily wage in respect of skilled labourer prevalent on the date of accident. Thus, computing compensation on such amount of income without disputing further aspects regarding age, multiplier and future prospects etc., the claimant - Appellants are found entitled for further consolidated sum of Rs.2,00,000/-.

8. In the result the appeal is disposed of with a direction to the insurer - Respondent No.2 to deposit a further consolidated sum of

Rs.2,00,000/- (two lakh) before the tribunal within two months from today, where-after the same shall be disbursed in favour of the claimants on such terms and proportion to be decided by the learned Tribunal.

9. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.

( B.P. Routray) Judge M.K.Panda