The Legal Manager vs Susama Nayak And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 2838 Ori

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                      MACA No.1236 of 2018
                 The Legal Manager, Bajaj Allianz
                 General Insurance Company Ltd.             ....           Appellant
                                                         Mr. G.P. Dutta, Advocate
                                             -versus-
                 Susama Nayak and Others                    ....        Respondents
                                Mr. K. Panigrahi, counsel for Respondents 1 to 4

                           CORAM:
                           SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
                                           ORDER

5.4.2023 Order No.

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

2. Heard Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel for the insurer - Appellant and Mr. K. Panigrahi, learned counsel for claimant - Respondents.

3. Present appeal by the insurer is directed against the impugned judgment dated 14th August, 2018 of learned 1st MACT, Jagatsinghpur passed in MAC Case No.1325 of 2014, wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.53,10,600/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 24th July, 2014 has been granted on account of death of deceased Basanta Kumar Nayak in the motor vehicular accident dated 11th June, 2014.

4. Mr. Dutta, learned counsel contends on behalf of the insurer that the offending vehicle, i.e. motor cycle bearing registration number OD-21-4720 was not involved in the accident and has been subsequently implanted to manage compensation. In this regard, he relies on the endorsement made in the inquest report as well as the death summery mentioned in the discharge certificate issued by Kalinga Hospital dated 12th June, 2014.

5. The case of the claimants, who are widow and sons of the deceased namely Basanta Kumar Nayak, is that while the deceased was coming to home on 11th June, 2014 in his Scooty, the offending motor cycle coming in a rash and negligent manner with high speed from behind dashed against the Scooty. As a result of the same the deceased was thrown aside and his head dashed against the electric pole. He was immediately taken to the hospital and while undergoing treatment succumbed on 12th June, 2014. The F.I.R. was lodged on 18th June, 2014 and the police upon completion of investigation submitted charge-sheet against the driver of the offending motor cycle for commission of offences under sections 279/304-A of I.P.C. along with Section 187 of the MV Act. The owner admitted involvement of the offending vehicle in the accident in his WS.

6. Perusal of the copies of evidences of P.W.3 and P.W.4, who are eye witnesses of the occurrence, speaks clearly about the accident and found supported by the police investigation report as well as admission of the owner. This establishes the case of the claimants fully. Therefore, no such further doubt remains with regard to involvement of the offending vehicle as contended by Mr. Dutta. Accordingly, the finding of the learned tribunal in this regard is confirmed.

7. With regard to quantum of compensation, it is seen that the tribunal taking average income of the deceased for last three years prior to the accident has computed the loss of dependency and derived the compensation amount by adopting all settled principles. I do not see any flaw in the same. Here Mr. Dutta contends that the sons of the deceased have taken over the Restaurant and liquor business of the deceased after his death by renewing the licence. But no supporting element is seen on record in support of such contention advanced by Mr. Dutta. It needs to be noted here that no such evidence regarding continuance of business of the deceased after his death by his dependents has been adduced on record from the side of the insurer. Therefore, the contention urged by Mr. Dutta in this regard is rejected. The quantification of amount as derived by the tribunal is thus confirmed.

8. In the result the appeal is dismissed and the insurer - Appellant is directed to deposit the entire compensation amount before the tribunal along with interest as per its direction within a period of two months from today; where-after the same shall be disbursed in favour of the claimant-Respondents on same terms and proportion as contained in the impugned judgment.

9. The copies of depositions and documents produced by Mr. Dutta in course of hearing are kept on record.

10. The statutory deposit made by the appellant - insurer before this court along with accrued interest thereof be refunded on proper application and on production of proof of deposit of the awarded amount before the tribunal.

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

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