Orissa High Court
Manager vs Shankarshan Mallik And Others on 9 January, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.999 of 2015
Manager,
M/s.Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. .... Appellant
Ms.Mitali Jesthi, Advocate
-versus-
Shankarshan Mallik and others .... Respondents
Mr.P.K.Sahu, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 & 2
CORAM:
JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
9.1.2023
Order No.
14. 1. The matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.
2. Heard Ms.Jesthi, learned counsel for the Appellant-
Insurer and Mr.Sahu, learned counsel for claimants-Respondent
Nos.1 & 2.
3. Present appeal by the insurer is against the judgment
dated 16th July, 2015 of the Addl. District Judge-Cum-4th MACT,
Angul, in M.A.C.No.70 of 2013, wherein compensation to the
tune of Rs.5,18,000/- has been granted along with interest @7%
per annum with effect from the date of filing of the claim
application on account of death of the deceased in the motor
vehicular accident on 12th June, 2012.
4. Ms.Jesthi submits for the Insurer-Appellant that driver
of other motorcycle, i.e. Hero Honda Shine Motorcycle bearing
Registration No.OR-19H-3854 was also negligent in causing the
accident and the drivers of both the vehicles did not have valid
driving license on the date of accident.
5. It is seen that according to the claimants, the deceased
was the pillion rider of Hero Honda Shine Motorcycle bearing
Registration No.OR-19H-3854 when the other Motorcycle, i.e.
Hero Honda Karizma (offending Motorcycle) bearing
Registration No.UP-65AH-6339 dashed it from the front. So the
accident was the result of front collision between two
motorcycles in one of which the deceased was the pillion rider.
The Tribunal while deciding issue no.1 has come to the
conclusion that the accident took place due to negligence of the
driver of the motorcycle bearing Registration No.UP-65AH-6339.
The conclusion of the Tribunal is based on oral evidence adduced
from the side of the claimants as well as the submission of
charge-sheet by the police against the driver of the offending
motorcycle. Admittedly, no evidence has been adduced from the
side of the Insurer. So the contention of Ms.Jesthi to contribute
negligence on the driver of other motorcycle has no merit and the
conclusion arrived by the Tribunal with regard to negligence on
the driver of Karizma motorcycle is confirmed.
6. With regard to quantification of compensation amount,
no challenge is advanced for the same. The Tribunal after
deducting 50% towards personal expenses has computed the loss
of dependency since the deceased was a bachelor. Though no
future prospect has been added, but this Court is not interested to
enter into such dispute in absence of any challenge from the side
of the claimants. However, the rate of interest is reduced to 6%
from 7%.
7. Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed by confirming the
amount granted by the Tribunal and the Insurer is directed to
deposit the entire compensation amount of Rs.5,18,000/-(Five
lakhs eighteen thousand) along with interest @6% per annum
from the date of filing of the claim application within a period of
two months from today; where-after the same shall be disbursed
in favour of the claimants on such terms and proportion to be
fixed by the Tribunal.
8. The statutory deposit made by the Appellant with
accrued interest thereon be refunded to him on proper application
and on production of proof of deposit of the award amount before
the learned Tribunal.
9. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
C.R.Biswal
