Orissa High Court
The Manager vs Apurba Gouda And Others on 29 March, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.655 of 2017
The Manager, Claims, Bajaj Allianz
General Insurance Co. Ltd. .... Appellant
Mr. G.P. Dutta, Advocate
-versus-
Apurba Gouda and Others .... Respondents
Mr. K. Panigrahi, counsel for Respondents 1 to 3
CORAM:
SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
29.3.2023
Order No.
08. 1. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel for insurer - Appellant
and Mr. K. Panigrahi, learned counsel for the claimant - Respondents.
3. Present appeal by the insurer is directed against the impugned
judgment dated 3rd April, 2017 of learned 3rd MACT, Bhanjanagar
passed in MAC Case No.77 of 2014, wherein compensation to the
tune of Rs.3,00,000/- along with interest @ 7% per annum from the
date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 17th June, 2014 has been
granted on account of death of deceased Kasi Gouda in the motor
vehicular accident dated 28th April, 2014.
4. It is submitted that Respondent No.1, namely Apurba Gouda
died in the meantime and his name may be deleted since other LRs of
the deceased are already on record. Accordingly the name of
Respondent No.1 is deleted.
5. Mr. Dutta, learned counsel submits on behalf of the insurer that
involvement of the offending vehicle, i.e. motor cycle bearing
registration number OR-07-Q-0841 is suspicious and the same has
been implanted subsequently to manage compensation. In support of
his submission Mr. Dutta relies on the copies of inquest report, dead
body challan and final form submitted in B.N. Pur P.S. UD Case
No.160 of 2014 under Ext.D, Ext.E and Ext.F/1.
6. The case of the claimants is that the offending motor cycle
dashed against the deceased from behind while he was going by walk.
He fell down on the road and died in the hospital. According to the
evidence of P.W.2, the independent eye witness, the accident took
place as the offending motor cycle dashed the deceased being driven
in rash and negligent manner.
7. It is true that initially B.N.Pur P.S. U.D. Case No.160 dated 29th
April, 2014 was registered and in the inquest report it is mentioned by
the son of the deceased that the deceased died by fall while going on
the road. Admittedly, the son of the deceased is not an eye witness of
the occurrence and the fact remains that he lodged the F.I.R. on 1st
May, 2014 stating the death of the deceased due to road traffic
accident involving the motor cycle. This was registered as Sorada P.S.
Case No.94 dated 1st May, 2014 and the police upon completion of
investigation has submitted the charge-sheet stating involvement of
the offending motor cycle in the accident causing death of the
deceased. The accused driver, namely Pitabash Swain has been
charge-sheeted for commission of offences under Sections 279/304-A
of I.P.C. As a matter of fact, the records of UD case were merged with
the charge-sheet and investigation report. Thus, what is contended by
the insurer to place reliance on the inquest report and the enquiry
report submitted in the UD Case has no merit for consideration.
8. It is seen that the evidence of P.W.2 as an eye witness has not
been sufficiently rebutted and the same is corroborated by the findings
of police in the investigation report. Therefore, the case of the
claimants regarding death of the deceased in the accident involving
the offending motor cycle is established. Accordingly the finding of
the tribunal in this regard is confirmed.
9. Undisputedly the offending motor cycle was validly insured on
the date of accident with present Appellant. With regard to quantum
of compensation, no such flaw is noticed in the direction of the
tribunal in quantifying the amount. However, the rate of interest is
reduced to 6% from 7%.
10. In the result the appeal is disposed of with a direction to the
insurer - Appellant to deposit entire compensation of Rs.3,00,000/-
(three lakhs) before the tribunal along with interest @ 6% per annum
from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 17th June 2014,
within a period of two months from today; where-after the same shall
be disbursed in favour of the claimant - Respondents on same terms
and proportion as contained in the impugned judgment. However the
direction of learned tribunal to pay the penal interest is waived.
11. The copies of evidences and exhibits produced in course of
hearing are kept on record.
12. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
M.K.Panda
