Sudarshan Mallick vs Madhusmita Mohapatra And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 6383 Ori

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                       MACA No.191 of 2016
                 Sudarshan Mallick                          ....           Appellant
                                                  Mr. B.N. Samantaray, Advocate



                                             -versus-




                 Madhusmita Mohapatra and Another           ....       Respondents
                                         Ms. R. Pati, counsel for Respondent No.2

                            CORAM:
                            SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
                                           ORDER

3.11.2022 Order No.

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

2. Heard Mr. B.N. Samantaray, learned counsel for the claimant - Appellant and Ms. R. Pati, learned counsel for insurer - Respondent No.2.

3. The main grievance of the claimant in the appeal is that the loss of income sustained by him has not been considered by the tribunal.

4. It is seen from page 6 of the impugned judgment that the tribunal disbelieved the contention of the claimant on the ground that he being a Government servant must have encashed his leave period.

5. Being asked, Mr. Samantaray denies the same and submits that such period has been treated as a break in his service and he has not received any remuneration for that period of leave taken for treatment.

6. In order to satisfy such contention, Mr. Samantaray undertakes to produce copy of his service book.

7. List the matter on 22nd December, 2022.

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