Daniel Swain vs Smt. Mamata Mohapatra And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 5049 Ori

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                   MACA No.631 of 2019


            Daniel Swain                              ....          Appellant
                                                     Mr. D.C. Dey, Advocate
                                    -versus-
            Smt. Mamata Mohapatra and another    ....       Respondents
                          Mr. B.C. Singh, Advocate for Respondent No.2


                          CORAM:
                          JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY

                                       ORDER

03.05.2023 Order No.

07. 1. Heard Mr. D.C. Dey, learned counsel for the Appellant-

claimant and Mr. B.C. Singh, learned counsel for Respondent No.2-Insurance Company.

2. Present appeal by the claimant is directed against the judgment dated 23.7.2019 of the learned 4th MACT, Cuttack in M.A.C. Case No.7 of 2008/300 of 2017, wherein the learned Tribunal has granted compensation to the tune of Rs.10,000/- along with simple interest @6% per annum to the claimant from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 02.01.2008 on account of injuries sustained by him in the motor vehicular accident dated 14.09.2007.

3. The injured-claimant has prayed for enhancement of the compensation amount. Admittedly, no injury report has been

produced by the claimant. The Police has not also sent the injured for examination. The accident took place on 14.9.2007, but the FIR was lodged on 14.10.2007, i.e. after one month of the alleged accident. The outdoor ticket produced under Ext.16, which is of the year 2013, does not reveal any connection with such injury sustained in the accident. No such document has been produced to justify sustenance of injury by the claimant in the accident. The learned Tribunal has elaborately dealt with all such contentions of the claimant to disbelieve his case regarding sustenance of such injuries narrated by him. However, the learned Tribunal has granted Rs.10,000/- in absence of materials. I do not find any merit in the contention of the Appellant to enhance the compensation amount in absence of material to that effect.

4. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.

                                                                        ( B.P. Routray)
                                                                             Judge




BASANTA      Digitally signed
     B.K. Barik
             by BASANTA
KUMAR KUMAR BARIK
             Date: 2023.05.04
BARIK        09:38:46 +05'30'