Rina Nayak And Others vs Duryodhan Sasmal And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 10494 Ori

                                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                                    MACA No.1361 of 2016
                                Rina Nayak and others                    ....         Appellants
                                                                     Mr. P.K. Mishra, Advocate
                                                         -versus-
                                Duryodhan Sasmal and others          ....       Respondents
                                              Mr. A.A. Khan, Advocate for Respondent No.2
                                                  Mr. S. Roy, Advocate for Respondent No.4
                           .




                                            CORAM:
                                            JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
                                                         ORDER

31.08.2023 Order No.

06. 1. Heard Mr. P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the Appellants-

claimants, Mr. A.A. Khan, learned counsel for Respondent No.2- Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited and Mr. S. Roy, learned counsel for Respondent no.4-United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

2. Present appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgment dated 07.11.2016 of learned 1st M.A.C.T., Jajpur passed in M.A.C. Case No.12 of 2012, wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.3,50,000/- has been granted along with interest @6% per annum to the claimants from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 8.2.2012 on account of death of the deceased in the motor vehicular accident dated 22.02.2007.

3. Mr. P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the Appellants submits that insurer-Respondent No.2 (Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited) has been exempted from the liability illegally.

He further submits that the amount of compensation should be

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Sep-2023 10:58:47 enhanced to such amount adding future prospects to the income of the deceased along with appropriate amount towards general damages.

4. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 10.8.2023, Mr. A.A. Khan, learned counsel for Respondent No.2 does not dispute the validity of the insurance policy in respect of the offending vehicle bearing Registration No.OR-04-G-0686 on the date of accident. In other words, the validity of the insurance policy is admitted. Therefore, no other dispute remains with regard to liability on the part of Insurer-Respondent No.2.

5. On the question of quantum of compensation, considering all such grounds of challenge advanced in the appeal including non- addition of future prospects and general damages, the amount of compensation is enhanced to Rs.5,59,820/- payable along with 6% interest per annum. Mr. P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the Appellants-claimants agrees to the same.

6. In the result, Respondent No.2-Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited is directed to deposit the modified compensation of Rs.5,59,820/- (rupees five lakhs fifty-nine thousand eight hundred twenty) before the Tribunal along with interest @6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 8.2.2012 within a period of two months from today; where-after the same shall be disbursed in favour of the claimants-Appellants on such terms and proportion to be fixed by the Tribunal.

7. Mr. A.A. Khan, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 at this stage submits that right of recovery should be extended in Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Sep-2023 10:58:47 favour of Insurer-Respondent No.2 since it is the finding of the learned Tribunal that the offending motorcycle was plied without any registration number.

8. For dealing with such contention of Mr. Khan, it is seen that the offending motorcycle was purchased on 19.2.2007 and the accident took place on 22.2.2007 and the vehicle was registered with competent authority on 28.2.2007. In terms of the provisions contained under Section 39 read with Section 43(2) of the M.V. Act, a motor vehicle can be plied on public road with temporary certificate of registration and a temporary registration mark in the prescribed manner for such period not exceeding one month. In the instant case, keeping in view the date of purchase of the motorcycle and the date of its registration, which remains undisputed, it can be well presumed that the same was not plied unauthorisedly on public road on the date of accident. Therefore, the contention regarding violation of policy conditions or violation of statutory provisions does not arise. As such, the contention of Mr. Khan to get right of recovery of the indemnified amount from the owner does not merit consideration.

9. The MACA is disposed of.

10. An urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

( B.P. Routray) Judge

B.K. Barik

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Sep-2023 10:58:47