Orissa High Court
Prafulla Kumar Das vs Baishnab Charan Das on 20 February, 2025
Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.72 of 2022
Prafulla Kumar Das .... Appellant
Mr. K.C. Nayak, Advocate
-versus-
Baishnab Charan Das .... Respondents
and Another Ms. R.B. Pati, Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
20.02.2025
Order No.
05. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Advocates
Welfare Fund filed in Court be kept in record.
3. The present appeal has been filed challenging the
impugned judgment dated 13.12.2021 so passed by the
learned 3rd MACT, Jajpur in MAC Case No.93 of 2014.
4. It is contended that claiming the compensation to
the tune of Rs.5 lakhs because of the injury sustained
by the appellant in a motor accident on 16.06.2007,
the claim application was filed in the year 2014. It is
contended that in the said claim application, owner of
the offending vehicle though was impleaded as O.P.
No.1, but due to non-taking of step for issuance of
notice on the owner-respondent, the claim application
// 2 //
against the owner-respondent was dismissed by the
Tribunal vide order dated 26.09.2019.
4.1. It is contended that factum of dismissal of the
claim application against the owner-respondent was
never brought to the notice of the appellant by the
engaged counsel and without intimating such fact with
taking of step to revive the claim against the owner-
respondent, the engaged counsel proceeded with the
matter.
4.2. However, since the claim against the owner-
respondent was dismissed on 26.09.2019 and a plea
was taken by the Respondent-Company that the driver
of the offending vehicle was not having the valid
Driving License, in absence of the owner being a party
to the proceeding, the claim application was rejected
vide the impugned judgment dated 13.12.2021.
4.3. It is contended that since for the latches on the
part of the engaged counsel, claim against the owner-
respondent was dismissed on 26.09.2019 and no step
was taken to revive the application till the matter was
finally decided by the Tribunal vide the impugned
judgment dated 13.12.2021, for such latches of the
engaged counsel, the appellant who is a bonafide
claimant, should not be made to suffer.
4.4. It is also contended that because of the accident
in question, the claimant-appellant remained as an
// 3 //
Indoor Patient in Kalinga Hospital, Bhubaneswar from
18.06.2007 to 17.08.2007 and spent substantial
amount for his treatment. But because of the latches
on the part of the engaged counsel, claim application
was dismissed vide the impugned judgment. It is
accordingly contended that the impugned judgment be
set aside and the matter be remitted to the Tribunal for
fresh disposal on merit and by giving liberty to the
appellant to revive the application against the owner-
respondent.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondent-
Company while supporting the impugned judgment,
contended that since because of the admitted latches
on the part of the appellant, the claim application was
dismissed against the owner-respondent vide order
dated 26.09.2019 and no step was taken to revive the
same till matter was finally decided by the Tribunal
vide the impugned judgment dated 13.12.2021, no
illegality or irregularity can be found with the
impugned judgment.
5.1. It is however contended that if at all this Court
will be inclined to remit the matter for fresh
adjudication, then claim of the appellant to get the
benefit of interest against any award to be passed be
confined from the date of this order till a fresh award is
passed by the tribunal.
// 4 //
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the submissions made, this Court finds
that for the accident in question in which the injured
sustained injury and remained as an Indoor Patient for
a pretty long period, claim application was filed in MAC
Case No.93 of 2014 before the learned 3rd MACT,
Jajpur. As found from the record, such claim
application as against owner-respondent was dismissed
vide order dated 26.09.2019. On the face of such order,
no step was taken to revive the application against the
owner-respondent till the matter was dismissed vide
the impugned judgment dated 13.12.2021.
6.1. Since the issue involved is with regard to the
claim made by the appellant in respect of the injury
sustained in a motor accident, for the latches of the
engaged counsel in reviving the application against
owner-respondent, the appellant should not be
deprived to get the benefit of compensation as due and
admissible. It is also settled position of law that for the
latches of the engaged counsel, a party should not be
met to suffer as decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court in
the case of Ashok Kumar Vrs. New India Assurance
Co. Ltd. reported in 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 587: 2023
INSC 659.
// 5 //
6.2. In view of such position and placing reliance on
the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
case of Ashok Kumar as cited (supra), this Court is
inclined to quash judgment dated 13.12.2021 so
passed by the Tribunal in MAC Case No.93 of 2014.
While remitting the matter for fresh disposal in
accordance with law, this Court grants liberty to the
appellant to take immediate step for revival of the
application against owner-respondent. Such an
application for revival be filed before the Tribunal
within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of
this order. On such filing of the application within the
aforesaid time period, the same be allowed by the
Tribunal and the matter shall be decided in accordance
with law by giving due opportunity of hearing to all
concerned.
6.3. Since the accident is of the year 2007 and the
claim application is of the year 2014, the Tribunal shall
do well to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as
possible. However, if any award will be passed, the
appellant will only be entitled to get the benefit of
interest from the date of this order till realisation.
7. The Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
Digitally Signed Judge
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Basudev
Date: 25-Feb-2025 17:03:50
