Orissa High Court
The Divisional Manager vs Jhumpa Chakrabarty And Others (In ... on 14 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.1118 of 2018
MACA No.1118 & 1184 of 2018
The Divisional Manager, Oriental
Insurance Company Ltd., (in MACA No.1118/2018)
Jhumpa Chakrabarty and Others (in MACA No.1184/2018)
.... Appellants
Mr. Subrat Satpathy, Advocate (in MACA No.1118/2018)
Mr. A.K. Otta, Advocate (in MACA No.1184/2018)
-versus-
Jhumpa Chakrabarty and Others (In MACA No.1118/2018)
Kalu Parida and Another (In MACA No.1184/2018)
.... Respondents
Mr. A.K. Otta, counsel for Respondents 1-5
(in MACA No.1118 of 2018)
Mr. Subrat Satpathy, counsel for Respondent No.2
(in MACA No.1184 of 2018)
CORAM:
SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
14.11.2022
Order No.
07. 1. The matters are taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard Mr. S. Satpathy, learned counsel for the insurer, i.e.
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and Mr. A.K. Otta, learned counsel
for the claimants.
3. Both the appeals being arise out of the same judgment, are
heard together and disposed of by this common order.
4. It is submitted by the parties that claimant Narmada Sankar
Rath, who is Appellant No.2 in MACA No.1184 of 2018 and
Respondent No.2 in MACA No.1118 of 2018, died in the meantime
on 30th April, 2021 and all other LRs being on record, no substitution
is required.
5. Both the appeals are against same impugned judgment dated
19th April, 2018 of learned 1st MACT, Cuttack passed in MAC Case
No.713 of 2015, wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.36,05,388/-
along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the
claim application, i.e. 30th September, 2015 has been granted on
account of death of deceased Rajendra Narayan Rath in the motor
vehicular accident dated 28th June, 2015.
6. MACA No.1118 of 2018 has been filed by the insurer
challenging the award. MACA No.1184 of 2018 has been preferred by
the claimants praying for enhancement of the compensation amount.
7. Mr. Satpathy, learned counsel on behalf of insurer submits that
present offending vehicle has been implanted to manage the
compensation, though not involved in the accident. He continues to
submit that involvement of present offending vehicle, i.e. motor cycle
bearing registration number OD 02U 2941 and the accused driver
(Kalu Parida), in road traffic accidents is so frequent that itself proves
implantation of the same motor cycle and driver in the present case
also. In this regard, Mr. Satpathy has filed I.A. No.41 of 2022 for
adducing additional evidence.
8. Admittedly, no evidence has been adduced by the insurer before
the tribunal except the salary particulars of the deceased under Ext.A.
The documents appended to I.A. No.41 of 2022 and sought to be
adduced by way of additional evidence, have been collected after the
impugned award was passed. Secondly, the purported certificate
issued by the Sun Hospital and appended to the I.A., which reveals
that the deceased was injured by collision with a tree, has no
authenticity being a Photostat copy issued by a private person. Such
contention made in the certificate is found incorrect on the face of the
F.I.R. and police papers. The contention of Mr. Satpathy is therefore
rejected outright. Further, no evidence being adduced to reveal
complicity of the offending motor cycle in other motor accident claim
cases, no force can be attached to the submissions of the insurer to
disbelieve the case of claimants. As such, the finding of the tribunal
regarding involvement of the offending motor cycle in the accident is
confirmed.
9. With regard to quantum of compensation it is submitted by Mr.
Otta, learned counsel for the claimants that the tribunal illegally did
not count different allowances of the deceased towards his income.
10. It is seen from the copy of Ext.13, the salary slip produced by
Mr. Otta in course of hearing, that, the total amount paid to the
deceased by his employer at the time of accident was Rs.26,575/- per
month. But the tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at
Rs.20,580/- only, i.e. his basic pay and HRA. No justification is found
in the approach of the tribunal in deducting other allowances from his
monthly remunerations. It needs to be mentioned here that the
employment of the deceased as the Service Manager of Field Motors
Ltd. is not disputed.
11. Thus considering the income of the deceased at Rs.26,375/- (i.e.
Rs.26,575/- minus professional tax of Rs.200/-) and completing all
formalities of computation, i.e. addition of 30% towards future
prospects, deduction of 1/4th towards personal expenses and applying
multiplier '14' etc, the total loss of dependency comes to
Rs.55,79,784/- which is payable along with interest @ 6%.
12. In the result, both the appeals are disposed of with a direction to
the insurer, i.e. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. to deposit the modified
compensation amount of Rs.55,79,784/- (fifty five lakhs seventy nine
thousand seven hundred eighty-four) before the tribunal along with
interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim
application, i.e. 30th September, 2015, within a period of two months
from today; where-after the same shall be disbursed in favour of the
claimant - Respondents (except claimant - Respondent No.2 in
MACA No.1118 of 2018, namely Narmada Sankar Rath) on such
terms and proportion to be decided by the learned tribunal.
13. The statutory deposit made by the insurer in MACA No.1118 of
2018 before this court along with accrued interest be refunded on
proper application and on production of proof of deposit before the
tribunal.
14. The copies of exhibits as produced by Mr. Otta in course of
hearing are kept on record.
15. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
M.K.Panda
