The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK MACA No.781 of 2019 Mamata Devi and others …. Appellant Mr. B. Singh, Advocate -Versus- Birendra Kumar and another Respondents Mr. P.K. Mahali, Advocate ….
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
Decision
ORDER 22.02.2024 Order No. 10. 1. Heard Mr. Singh, learned counsel for claimants appellants and Mr. Mahali, learned counsel for respondent No.2 Insurance Company. 2. None appears for respondent No.1,namely, owner of the offending vehicle. 3. Instant appeal is filed by the claimants appellants challenging nil award passed in M.A.C. Case No.191/311 of 2014/2011 by learned 4th M.A.C.T., Balasore on the grounds stated therein. 4. Mr. Singh, learned counsel for the claimants appellants submits that the learned Tribunal declined to award in compensation solely on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle was found to be not negligent and was acquitted in the criminal case by a judgment marked as Ext.6, he having been tried for an offence under Section 302IPC, which is not legally tenable in view of the settled law and while claiming so, he refers to the following decisions, such as,Himachal Road Transport Corporation and others Vrs. Jarnail Singh and others MANU/HP/0227/2008; N.K.V. Bros.(P) Ltd. Vrs. M. Karumai Ammal and others AIR 1980SC1354; and Chotu Lal and Page 1 of 4 others Vrs. Chamali Bai and others MANU/RH/0253/1996 to contend that finding of criminal court cannot be taken aid of and appliedin an accident claim case, hence, therefore, the impugned nil award is liable to be interferedwith and set aside remanding the matter back for its disposal as per and in accordance with law. 5. Mr. Mahali, learned counsel for respondent No.2 Insurance Company, however, justifies the decision of the learned Tribunal on the ground that the driver of the vehicle in question was found not guilty and he stood acquitted of the charge under Section 302 IPC. Furthermore, Mr. Mahali relies on a decision of the Apex Court in Smt. Rita Devi and others Vrs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd and another (2000)AIR (SCW) 1579 by advancing an argument that it was alleged to be a case of accidental murder, so therefore, compensation cannot be allowed. 6. In so far as, the decision of the learned Tribunal is concerned, as it is made to appear, the same is entirely based on the findings of the criminal court and acquittal of the driver of the offending vehicle from a charge under Section 302 IPC. Of course, a conclusion has been reached at by the learned Tribunal that the said driver was not guilty of any negligence but practically speaking, the order of acquittal has influenced it to direct a nil award. A copy of the acquittal judgment i.e.Ext.6 has been referred to and considering the evidence discussed therein, the Tribunal reached at a conclusion that since the driver of the offending vehicle stood discharged from the allegation and there has been no negligence proved, awardingany compensation in favour of the claimants of the deceased is not possible. 7. The decisions in Jarnail Singh and M. KarumaiAmmal (supra) have categorically held that the findings of a criminal court cannot be taken in aid of in accident claim address. In Jarnail Singh Page 2 of 4 ibid, the Court held that the claim application cannot failmerely because there has been an acquittal in the criminal case, inasmuch as, acquittal of a driver after a trial is not binding upon the Claims Tribunal. A similar view has been expressed by the Apex Court in M. Karumai Ammal (supra) when a plea was raised by the Insurance Company on the premise of order of acquittal but the same was rejected.In Chotu Lal (supra), the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench reiterated the established and legal principles that findings of a criminal court cannot be taken advantage of in civil or compensation claim cases. Having regard to the aforesaid decisions, the Court is of the view that the learned Tribunal ought not to have swayed away by the order of acquittal vis-à-vis the driver of the offending vehicle. In other words, the learned court below should have discussed the evidence in its entirety and could not have passed a nil award against the claimantsappellants on the basis of the findings of the criminal court and acquittal of the driver of the vehicle in question. 8. In so far as, the decision in Smt. Rita Devi (supra) is concerned, it is in relation to a distinction made between a felonious act of murder and accidental murder. In any view of the matter, the driver of the offending vehicle in the present case stands acquitted of the charge of murder, so therefore, no occasion arises for the Court to distinguish the conduct of the driver of the offending vehicle as to if it was case of accidental murder or otherwise. Having said that, the Court reaches at a conclusion that the decision of the learned Tribunal is not sustainable in law and hence, the matter is required to be remitted back for a fresh decision on the evidence received so far with such further evidence from the respective parties and for its disposal as per and in accordance with law within a stipulated period as the same would serve the purpose and meet the ends of justice. 9. Hence, it is ordered. Page 3 of 4 10. In the result, the appeal stands allowed. As a necessary corollary, the impugned award dated 20th July, 2019 in M.A.C. Case No.191/311 of 2014/2011 passed by learned 4th M.A.C.T., Balasore is hereby set aside. Consequently, the matter stands restored to file with a direction to the learned Tribunal to consider the evidence on record and if necessary to receive such further evidence from both the sides and thereafter, to proceed and to dispose it of according to law at the earliest preferably within the period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is further directed that the parties shall appear before learned 4th M.A.C.T., Balasore on 12th March, 2024 so as to receive further directions in that regard. (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge Rojina Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJINA SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CTC Date: 23-Feb-2024 19:54:01 Page 4 of 4