Praveen Bej vs Yazdani International Pvt. Ltd. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4309 Ori

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                  MACA No.1158 of 2017
                 Praveen Bej                               ....          Appellant
                                                         Mr. D.C. Dey, Advocate
                                            -versus-
                 Yazdani International Pvt. Ltd. and
                 Another                                   ....       Respondents
                                    Mr. G.P. Dutta, counsel for Respondent No.2

                            CORAM:
                            SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
                                         ORDER

25.4.2023 Order No.

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

2. Heard Mr. D.C. Dey, learned counsel for claimant- Appellant and Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel for the insurer- Respondent No.2.

3. Present appeal by the injured - claimant - Appellant is directed against the impugned judgment dated 31st August, 2017 of learned 4th MACT, Cuttack passed in MAC Case No.112 of 2014/04 of 2017, wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.5,47,200/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 14th February, 2014 has been granted on account of injuries sustained by the injured in the motor vehicular accident dated 11th April, 2013.

4. Mr. Dey, learned counsel for the injured - claimant submits that he remained in the hospital as an indoor patient from 11th April, 2013 to 15th January, 2014. But as reveals from Ext.7, Ext.7/a and Ext.7/b the claimant remained as indoor patient from 11th April, 2013 to 7th June, 2013, 26th August, 2013 to 23rd September, 2013 and 17th December, 2013 to 5th January, 2014 at SCB Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack. Accordingly, considering the period of treatment of the injured - claimant as an indoor as well as outdoor patient, in the opinion of this court, a further consolidated sum of Rs.2,00,000/- would serve the purpose. It is to be noted here that, according to Mr. Dey, the claim for enhancement is not on any other heads except towards treatment expenses.

5. 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 lakhs) before the tribunal within a period of two months from today; where-after the same shall be disbursed in favour of the injured - claimant on such terms and proportion to be decided by learned tribunal.

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

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