Orissa High Court
Divisional Manager vs Bira Pradhan And Another on 28 March, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.61 of 2013
Divisional Manager, Oriental .... Appellant
Insurance Co. Ltd.
Mr. N.B. Das, Advocate
-versus-
Bira Pradhan and another .... Respondents
Mr. S. B. Das, Advocate for Respondent No.1
.
CORAM:
JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
28.03.2023
Order No.
17. 1. Heard Mr. N.B. Das, learned counsel for the Appellant-
Insurance Company and Mr. S.B. Das, learned counsel for the
Respondent No.1-claimant.
3. Present appeal by the insurer is directed against the judgment
dated 26.05.2012 of learned 2nd M.A.C.T., Cuttack in Misc. Case
No.248 of 1990, wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.60,000/-
has been granted along with interest @6% per annum to the
claimant from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e.
16.03.1990 on account of injury sustained by him in the motor
vehicular accident dated 6.1.1990.
4. Mr. N.B. Das, learned counsel submits on behalf of the
Appellant-Insurance Company that the offending vehicle, i.e.
Truck bearing Registration No.ORO-2485 was never insured with
the Appellant and therefore, they are not liable to indemnify the
compensation amount. It is further submitted that the insurance
policy number reflected in the claim application is in respect of a
Scooter and is no way connected with the offending vehicle.
5. It is seen that the Insurance Company did not adduce any
positive evidence to deny existence of insurance policy in respect
of the offending vehicle. The claimant relying upon the Police
seizure list has mentioned the policy number in the application.
The Insurance Company has filed copy of the policy under Ext.E
corresponding to the number mentioned in the claim application
to contend that the vehicle was not insured with them. The
Insurance Company did neither examine any witness on their
behalf nor produce the concerned register or any other evidence
to deny existence of any valid insurance policy in respect of the
offending vehicle. Admittedly, the owner of the vehicle did not
come to contest and has been set ex-parte. Therefore, in absence
of any positive evidence adduced from the side of the insurer to
deny valid insurance policy of the offending vehicle, their
contention in this regard is not found acceptable. However, since
the owner has failed to contest the case and remained silent after
filing his W.S., the right of recovery is extended in favour of the
Insurance Company.
6. There being no further dispute raised with regard to quantum of
compensation, the amount granted by the learned Tribunal is
confirmed.
7. In the result, the appeal is disposed of with a direction to the
Appellant - Insurance Company to deposit entire compensation
amount along with interest within a period of two months from
today before the Tribunal as per its direction, where-after the
same shall be disbursed in favour of the claimant-Respondent
No.1 on same terms and proportion as contained in the impugned
judgment.
8. As observed earlier, the Appellant-Insurance Company is
granted with right of recovery, if recoverable, from the owner of
the vehicle in accordance with law after affording opportunity of
hearing to the owner.
9. On deposit of the award amount before the 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.
10. An urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
B.K. Barik
