The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Puspa Mahananda & Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 11348 Ori

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                     MACA No.191 of 2023
                 The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,
                 represented through its Regional
                 Manager, Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneswar        ....         Appellant
                                                       Mr. A.A. Khan, Advocate
                                        -versus-
                 Puspa Mahananda & Others              ....       Respondents
                              Mr. P.K. Mishra, counsel for Respondents 1 to 3

                           CORAM:
                           SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
                                      ORDER

15.9.2023 Order No.

03. 1. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Heard Mr. A.A. Khan, learned counsel for the Appellant - insurer and Mr. P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for claimant - Respondents.

3. Present appeal by the insurer is directed against the impugned judgment dated 18th October, 2022 of learned 1st M.A.C.T., Bargarh passed in MAC No.79 of 2017, wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.9,84,200/- along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 23rd August, 2017 has been granted on account of death of deceased Bikash Mahananda in the motor vehicular accident dated 7th May, 2016.

4. The specific challenge of Mr. Khan, learned counsel is that the driver of offending vehicle, which is a tanker, did not have authorization to drive hazardous vehicle and therefore, there is violation of policy condition.

5. Perused the copy of registration certificate and permit under Ext.A and Ext.C, as produced by Mr. Mishra in course of hearing. From the permit under Ext.C it reveals that the offending vehicle is a heavy goods carriage vehicle and permitted to carry non-prohibited goods. Therefore the offending vehicle, despite being a tanker, cannot be treated as a carrier of hazardous materials requiring special endorsement of the driver in his DL. When in the permit it is specifically mentioned that the vehicle is authorized to carry only non-prohibited goods, in the opinion of this court, its driver does not require any specific endorsement for hazardous materials and as such absence of such endorsement in his DL does not attract violation of policy condition. Accordingly the contention raised by Mr. Khan in that respect is rejected.

6. On the question of quantum of compensation, no reason is found in favour of the insurer to reduce the same. However, the rate of interest is reduced to 6% from 7%.

7. In the result the appeal is disposed of with a direction to the insurer

- Appellant to deposit before the tribunal the entire compensation of Rs.9,84,200/- (nine lakhs eighty-four thousand two hundred) along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 23rd August, 2017, within a period of two months from today; where- after the same shall be disbursed in favour of claimant - Respondents on the same terms and proportion as contained in the impugned judgment.

8. The statutory deposit made by the Appellant before this court along with accrued interest thereon shall be refunded on proper application and on production of proof of deposit of the awarded amount before the tribunal.

9. The copies of exhibits as produced by Mr. Mishra in course of hearing are kept on record.

10. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.

(B.P. Routray) Judge M.K. Panda

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: MANAS KUMAR PANDA Designation: Senior Steno Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, Cuttack