Orissa High Court
Bhanu Prakash Joshi (Since Dead) vs Managing Director on 5 January, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.727 of 2004
Bhanu Prakash Joshi (since dead)
though his LRs. .... Appellants
Mr. Sushanta Kumar Joshi, Advocate
-versus-
Managing Director, Orissa State Road
Transport Corporation, Buxibazar, .... Respondent
Cuttack
Mr. B.K. Sahoo, Advocate
CORAM:
SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
5.1.2023
Order No.
14. 1. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard Mr. S.K. Joshi, learned counsel for the claimant -
Appellants and Mr. B.K. Sahoo, learned counsel for Respondent -
Orissa State Road Transport Corporation (in short 'the Corporation').
3. Present appeal by the claimant is against the impugned
judgment dated 15th September, 2004 of learned MACT, Nuapada
passed in MJC Case No.12/17 of 1984-2004, wherein compensation
to the tune of Rs.25,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from
the date of filing of the claim application has been granted on account
of injuries sustained by the original claimant in the motor vehicular
accident dated 9th August, 1983.
4. The facts of the case are that the original claimant (injured) on
the date of accident, i.e. 9th August, 1983 was a Member of Odisha
Legislative Assembly and travelling in the bus bearing registration
number ORR-3225 from Nuapada to Komna. On the way, the other
bus, also belonging to the Respondent - Corporation, bearing
registration number ORR-2667 was coming from the opposite
direction. Both the buses collided front to front and the injured, who
was sitting in the front seat, sustained injuries including bruises and
compound fracture of leg. He underwent treatment as an indoor
patient for the period from 9th August, 1983 to 10th January, 1984 in
the local Hospital as well as in the SCB Medical College and
Hospital, cuttack.
5. The tribunal had passed the award twice, i.e. on 3rd October,
1991 and 7th October, 1994 and two appeals were preferred before this
court earlier in MA No.41 of 1992 and 20 of 1995.
6. During pendency of present appeal, the original claimant died
and accordingly his LRs are substituted.
7. It is contended on behalf of the appellants that the tribunal
entirely disbelieved the disability aspect of the injured - claimant and
his loss of income also. According to Mr. Joshi, learned counsel for
the Appellants, the amount granted towards compensation is too less
and needs to be enhanced.
8. Upon hearing Mr. Sahoo, learned counsel for Respondent -
Corporation and perusal of the impugned award it reveals that two
witnesses have been examined by the claimant and the police papers
as well as medical discharge certificate and other treatment papers
have been adduced in evidence. No evidence has been adduced from
the side of the Corporation.
9. The tribunal has computed the compensation on the following
heads:
i) Rs.5000/- towards medical expenses,
ii) Rs.5000/- towards pain and suffering; and
iii) Rs.15,000/- towards discomfort, loss of amenities of
life and other miscellaneous expenses.
10. Admittedly, the Sub-Divisional Hospital, Nuapada and SCB
Medical College, Cuttack are Government hospitals and the injured
was a sitting MLA at that relevant time. The discharge certificate
under Ext.6 discloses that at the time of discharge, the condition of the
injured was satisfactory. The injured has not filed any medicine bills
nor has he filed any money receipt showing expenses towards
purchase of other treatment materials except Ext.4, a receipt
amounting Rs.74/- towards purchase of two crutches. No document
has also been adduced by the injured to reveal anything there-from
regarding his future treatment for such injuries sustained in the
accident. Thus, considering the status of the injured as a sitting MLA
and the Hospitals as Government Hospitals, the expenses of treatment
as computed by the tribunal, keeping in mind the date of accident, is
found proper and this court does not see any reason to interfere with
the same for enhancement.
11. In the case of Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar and Another, (2011)
1 SCC 343 the principles have been enumerated for granting
compensation in a case of injury where the injuries are associated with
permanent disability resulting loss of income.
In the case at hand, though it is claimed by the injured that he
sustained disability due to the injuries sustained in the accident but not
a single document has been adduced to that effect. Neither any
disability certificate nor any other paper relating to his future
treatment has been produced on record. The income of the injured,
except from his official position, has also not been substantiated
through evidence. The tribunal disbelieved all such contentions of the
injured regarding his income aspect from agriculture, story writing,
etc. Since the condition of the injured was seen satisfactory and there
is no further material brought on record regarding his disablement in
any manner, this court agrees with the finding of the learned tribunal
to opine that the injured did not sustain any disability out of the
injuries sustained in the accident. With regard to his entitlement for
loss of income during his treatment period, there is no material
produced on record that the injured sustained any loss of income
during his treatment. Considering his position as a sitting MLA it is
apparent that he did not have suffered from any loss of income from
official source during treatment period. However, though no
documents were produced there with regard to agricultural income of
the injured, but keeping in view his treatment for around 5 months,
this court feels it proper to grant a consolidated sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
(keeping in view the date of accident), towards loss of actual income
from agriculture.
12. The other counts assessed by the tribunal towards pain and
suffering and miscellaneous heads are left undisturbed in absence of
any material brought on record to disturb the same.
13. In the result the appeal is disposed of with a direction to the
Respondent - Corporation to deposit a further consolidated sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- (one lakh) before the tribunal, within a period of four
months from today, where-after the same shall be disbursed in favour
of the claimants - Appellants on such terms and proportion to be
decided by the learned tribunal.
14. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
M.K.Panda
