Orissa High Court
M/S. United India Insurance ... vs Sri Ram Fukar Majhi & Ors on 23 August, 2023
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 12-Sep-2023 10:49:28
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.793 of 2013
(From the judgment dated 17th May, 2013 passed by the 2nd MACT,
Cuttack in Misc.Case No.1220 of 1996)
M/S. United India Insurance Co.Ltd ...... Appellant
Versus
Sri Ram Fukar Majhi & Ors. ...... Respondents
Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-
For Appellant : Mr. S.Satpathy, Advocate
For Respondents : Mr. B.B.Singh, Advocate for Respondents
CORAM: JUSTICE B.P. ROUTRAY
JUDGMENT
23rd August, 2023
B.P.Routray, J.
1. Heard Mr.Satpathy, learned counsel for the Appellant &
Mr.Singh, learned counsel for the Respondents.
2. Present appeal by the Insurer is directed against judgment
dated 17th May 2013 of 2nd MACT, Cuttack in Misc. Case No.1220 of
1996, wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.1,77,300/- has been granted
along with interest @7% per annum with effect from the date of filing of
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 12-Sep-2023 10:49:28
the claim application on account of death of the deceased in the motor-
vehicular accident dated 20th October, 1996.
3. Mr. Satpathy submits that same Claimants had preferred
W.C. Case No. 76 of 1997 before learned Commissioner for Workmen's
under the provisions of Employee's Compensation Act and received
compensation amounting Rs.1,63,853/-. The said amount directed by the
learned Employee's Commissioner has been satisfied and received by
the Claimants. Mr. Satpathy thus submits that present claim application
which was filed subsequently under the MV Act is not entertainable.
4. Mr.Singh, learned counsel for the Claimants is unable to
dispute the contentions of the Insurer regarding receipt of compensation
under the provisions of Employee's Compensation Act. Rather the fact
of receipt of compensation by the Claimants in W.C. Case No. 76 of
1997 is admitted. However, Mr.Singh contends that receiving
compensation under the Employee's Compensation Act would not stand
as a bar to maintain present claim application.
5. It is true that the Claimants in such case where the deceased
was a workman and a victim of motor-vehicular accident, has the option
to choose either forum as per the provisions contained under Section
167 of MV Act. But he cannot choose both forums to get double
compensation. The rationale behind the provision under Section 167 is
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 12-Sep-2023 10:49:28
that, once the same cause of action gives rise claim for damages, it
cannot be counted twice for the self same cause. In Bharti AXA General
Insurance Co.Ltd vrs. Shanti & Ors., 2013(2) TAC 714 (M.P.), where
the Claimant has approached the Workmen's Compensation Court after
receiving the compensation under Section 166 of the MV Act, the Single
Judge of Madhya Pradesh High Court with reference to the case of
National Insurance Co.Ltd. vrs. Sebastian K.Jacob, (2009) 4 SCC 778
and the decision of Bombay High Court in Nitin Transport vrs.
Maharashtra State Road Corporation, 2002 ACJ 1383(Bombay) and
many other decisions of different other High Courts, held that second
claim application filed by the same Claimants after receiving the award
is not maintainable under the MV Act.
6. A person who is a victim of motor-vehicular accident is
entitled to claim for compensation under the Employee's Compensation
Act if he satisfies the requirements as a workman there under without
prejudice to the provisions under the MV Act. But the claim of
compensation under both the Acts, instead of either Act, is certainly
impermissible to avoid double compensation. This Court in the case of
Tanulata Pradhan & Anr vrs.Mahendra Prasad & Anr, 2013
(Supplementary 2) OLR 681 have also observed in the same line.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 12-Sep-2023 10:49:28
7. Therefore, in the facts of the present case where admittedly
the Claimants have already received the compensation under provisions
of the Employee's Compensation Act, their further claim for
compensation under the MV Act is not entertainable. Accordingly, it is
held that the Claimants are not entitled to get further compensation
under the Motor Vehicle Act.
8. The appeal is allowed and the impugned award is set aside.
9. The statutory deposit made by the Appellant with accrued
interest thereon shall be refunded to him on proper application.
10. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
S.Das
