United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Susama Patjoshi And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 1427 Ori

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                       MACA No.605 of 2007

                United India Insurance Co. Ltd.        ....         Appellant
                                                 Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Advocate
                                          -versus-
                Susama Patjoshi and others             ....      Respondents
            .




                            CORAM:
                            JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY

                                           ORDER

10.02.2023 Order No.

09. 1. Heard Mr. S.K. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Appellant-

Insurance Company. No one entered appearance for the claimants-Respondents despite valid service of notice.

2. It is submitted by Mr. Mohanty that the claimant-Respondent No.4, who died in the meantime need not be substituted further since all other LRs are already present on record. As such, the name of Respondent No.4 is deleted.

3. Present appeal by the insurer is directed against judgment dated 18.05.2007 of learned 2nd M.A.C.T., Northern Division, Sambalpur in Misc.(A) Case No.59 of 2001(S), wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.6,89,136/- has been granted along with interest @6% per annum to the claimants from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 17.3.2001 on account of death of the deceased in the motor vehicular accident dated 13.10.2000.

4. Mr. S.K. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Appellant-insurer submits that the driver of the offending Truck bearing Registration No.MP-23-DA-0386 was not negligent for the cause of accident since the same was in parking condition at the time of accident.

5. Upon perusal of the impugned judgment, it reveals that the accident took place during the night time due to wrong and negligent parking of the offending Truck on road. Accordingly, the Police upon completion of investigation has submitted the charge-sheet against the accuser-driver of the offending Truck. The insurer has never disputed the findings of the Police investigation report nor it adduced any evidence to rebut the contentions of P.W.1 with regard to negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle. As such, no merit is seen in the contention of the insurer.

6. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire compensation amount before the Tribunal along with interest within a period of two months from today; where-after the same shall be disbursed in favour of the claimants-Respondent Nos.1, 2, 3 and 5 on such terms and proportion to be fixed by the Tribunal.

However, it is made clear that this Court has not disturbed the direction of learned Tribunal regarding right of recovery granted in favour of the Insurance Company.

7. 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 before this Court with accrued interest thereon shall be refunded to the Appellant- Insurance Company.

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

( B.P. Routray) Judge

B.K. Barik