M/S.Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Babaji Charan Sahu (Since Dead)
2023 Latest Caselaw 3017 Ori

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

          MACA No.25 of 2011 & MACA No.45 of 2011


(From the judgment dated 19th October, 2010 passed by learned 2nd
M.A.C.T., N.D., Sambalpur in M.A.C. Case No.45 of 1997 (K))

In MACA No.25 of 2011
M/s.Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.          ....                 Appellant
                                      -versus-
Babaji Charan Sahu (since dead) ....                    Respondents
through LRs and another


Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-

          For Appellant         : Mr. P. Sinha, Advocate

          For Respondents       : Mr. S. Mohanty, Advocate
                                  For Respondent No.1



In MACA No.45 of 2011
Indumati Sahu and another                ....                Appellants
                                      -versus-
Sushil Kumar Saha and another           ....            Respondents


Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-
          For Appellants        : Mr. S. Mohanty, Advocate

          For Respondents       : Mr. P. Sinha, Advocate
                                  For Respondent No.2




MACA Nos.25 & 45 of 2011                                   Page 1 of 7
              CORAM: JUSTICE B.P. ROUTRAY
                             JUDGMENT

10th April, 2023

B.P. Routray, J.

1. Heard Mr. P. Sinha, learned counsel for the Insurance Company

and Mr. S. Mohanty, learned counsel for the claimants.

2. Both the appeals being arise out of the common judgment dated

19.10.2010 of learned 2nd MACT, N.D., Samablpur in M.A.C. Case

No.45 of 1997 (K), wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.36,000/-

has been granted along with interest @6% per annum to the injured-

claimant from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e.24.02.1997

on account of injury sustained by the original claimant in a motor

vehicular accident dated 2.9.1996, are heard together and disposed of

by this common order.

3. MACA No.25 of 2011 has been filed by the insurer challenging

the award and MACA No.45 of 2011 has been filed by the LRs of the

injured praying for enhancement of the compensation amount.

4. The accident took place on 2.9.1996 and as per the injury report

filed under Ext.6, the original claimant sustained three simple injuries.

Subsequently, fourth injury was detected during his treatment which

was fracture on 2nd vertebra. As per the injured, he underwent

treatment as an indoor patient in S.C.B. Medical College & Hospital,

Cuttack for a period of ten days. At the time of accident, he was

serving as a Teacher in Kuanar Primary School. Subsequently, he took

volunteer retirement due to permanent incapacitation. As per the

opinion of Medical Board under Ext.9 (dated 16.2.1998), the original

claimant, namely, Babaji Charan Sahu was permanently incapacitated

for further service in consequence of post traumatic monoblegia

bladder dysfunction. During pendency of both the appeals, the original

claimant died on 18.1.2016.

5. Accordingly, it is contended on behalf of the claimants that the

original claimant is entitled for loss of future income.

6. On the other hand, the insurance company disowns his liability

to indemnify the compensation amount on the ground that the

offending vehicle, i.e. Truck bearing Registration No.WB-03-3567 was

not insured with them on the date of accident.

7. First dealing with the prayer of the claimants for enhancing the

compensation amount, their claim to enhance the compensation

amount on the count of loss of future income is not found convincible.

It is for the reason that the reason of permanent incapacitation has no

nexus with the injuries sustained in the accident. As per Ext.9, the

original claimant was suffering from bladder dysfunction and it is not

stated anything therein that the same is anyway related to such injuries

sustained in the accident dated 2.9.1996. Three simple injuries

mentioned in the injury report under Ext.6 are to the effect that two

injuries on the right occipital region over the head and third one on the

right knee. It is further admitted by the injured that he was treated as an

indoor patient for 10 days only. Neither such simple injuries sustained

by him nor the grievous injury as mentioned in the Discharge

Certificate have any connection with bladder dysfunction and

therefore, the permanent incapacitation sustained by the injured is

found unrelated to the same. As such, the prayer of the claimants for

future loss of income is rejected.

8. The learned Tribunal has granted Rs.25,000/- for the injuries and

Rs.11,000/- towards treatment expenses. The amount so directed by the

learned Tribunal is though found unambiguous without specific count,

but the same is found just taking the quantification as a whole and as

per prevalent value of money on the date of accident. As such, no merit

is seen to enhance the same.

9. With regard to liability of the insurance company, it is seen that

according to the Police seizure list, the offending vehicle was insured

with Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. on the date of accident. The seizure

list prepared by the Police and exhibited on behalf of the claimants has

not been objected by the insurance company. They also did not adduce

any evidence in support of their denial regarding validity of the

insurance policy. Thus the contention raised by the insurance company

to exonerate them from the liability is found without merit.

Accordingly, the finding of learned Tribunal that the insurance

company is liable to indemnify the compensation amount is confirmed.

10. In the result, both the appeals are disposed of with a direction to

the insurer i.e. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. to deposit the entire

compensation amount along with interest as directed by learned

Tribunal in the impugned award within a period of two months from

today; where-after the same shall be disbursed in favour of the present

Appellants in MACA No.45 of 2011, who are the LRs of the original

claimant, on such terms and proportion to be decided by the Tribunal.

11. On deposit of the award amount before learned Tribunal and

filing of a receipt evidencing the deposit with a refund application

before this Court, the statutory deposit made in MACA No.25 of 2011

before this Court with accrued interest thereon shall be refunded to the

Insurance Company.

12. It is submitted that now the record in MAC Case No.45 of 1997

(K) is in the record room of 1st M.A.C.T., Keonjhar and as such, Mr.

Mohanthy, learned counsel for the claimants prays that 1st M.A.C.T.,

Keonjhar may be authorized to receive the deposit and disburse the

amount since the claim application was originally filed before the

learned 1st M.A.C.T., Keonjhar. Accordingly, the 1st M.A.C.T.,

Keonjhar is directed to verify the correctness of the submission made

by Mr. Mohanty from his record room and if the concerned record is

found available there, then the deposited amount shall be accepted by

him (1st M.A.C.T., Keonjhar) and disbursed in favour of the LRs of the

original injured as directed above.

13. The copies of Ext.6 and Ext.9 as produced in course of hearing

are kept on record.

(B.P. Routray) Judge

B.K. Barik/Secretary