Misc. Case No. 20 of 2005 · The High Court
Case Details
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Jan-2024 10:57:03 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK MACA No.401 & 402 of 2021 (From the judgment dated 4th March, 2021 passed by the learned 5th M.A.C.T., Khurda in M.A.C.T. Case No.19 of 2005 and M.A.C.T. Misc. Case No.20 of 2005 respectively) In MACA No.401 of 2021 The Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. …. -versus- Smt. Sanjukta Ranasingh and others …. Advocate(s) appeared in this case:- Appellant Respondents For Appellant : Mr. R.C. Sahoo (1), Advocate For Respondents : Dr.T.C. Mohanty, Senior Advocate For Respondent Nos.1 to 4
Legal Reasoning
Mr. B. Dasmohapatra, Advocate For Respondent Nos.6 & 7 In MACA No.402 of 2021 The Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. …. -versus- Appellant Sri Balabhadra Sahoo and others …. Respondents Advocate(s) appeared in this case:- For Appellant : Mr. R.C. Sahoo (1), Advocate For Respondents : Dr.T.C. Mohanty, Senior Advocate For Respondent Nos.1 & 2 Mr. B. Dasmohapatra, Advocate For Respondent Nos.4 & 5 MACA Nos.401 & 402 of 2021 Page 1 of 9 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Jan-2024 10:57:03 CORAM: JUSTICE B.P. ROUTRAY JUDGMENT 13th December, 2023 B.P. Routray, J. 1. Both the appeals arising out of MACT Case Nos.19 of 2005 and 20 of 2005 are involving same accident and therefore are heard
Decision
together and disposed of by this common judgment. 2. MACA No.401 of 2021 has been filed against judgment and award dated 4th March 2021 passed in MACT Case Nos.19 of 2005 and MACA No.402 of 2021 has been filed against judgment and award dated 4th March 2021 passed in MACT Misc. Case Nos.20 of 2005 of learned 5th M.A.C.T., Khurda, wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.6,36,000/- and Rs.5,93,000/- has been granted respectively on account of death of the deceased persons in the motor vehicular accident dated 25th August 2000. 3. The insurer, i.e. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. is the Appellant in both appeals. MACA Nos.401 & 402 of 2021 Page 2 of 9 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Jan-2024 10:57:03 4. The common case of the claimants is that, the deceased persons, namely, Ajay Kumar Ranasingh and Prasanta Kumar Sahoo were going in the Scooter bearing Regd. No.OR-02-P-2666 as the driver and pillion rider on 25.08.2000 night. At that time, the offending Truck bearing Regd. No.OR-02-C-6097 dashed against them being driven in a rash and negligent manner causing death of both the riders of the Scooter. Concerning the accident, Jankia P.S. Case No.147 dated 25th August 2000 was registered for commission of offences 279/337/304- A, I.P.C. Police upon completion of investigation submitted final report stating that though the accident is true, but no clue is there with regard to involvement of any offending vehicle. 5. The claim cases were earlier dismissed by the learned Tribunal and against the same, the claimants preferred appeal before this Court in MACA No.460 & 461 of 2012, wherein this Court by order dated 15.03.2019 remanded the matter for fresh decision by setting aside the earlier decision of the Tribunal dated 16.02.2012. Accordingly, both parties adduced fresh evidence and the learned Tribunal upon re- adjudication has passed present impugned awards directing for payment of compensation in favour of the claimants. MACA Nos.401 & 402 of 2021 Page 3 of 9 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Jan-2024 10:57:03 6. The claimants in MACA No.401 of 2021 are the wife, minor son (now major) and parents of deceased-Ajay Kumar Ranasingh. The claimants in MACA No.402 of 2021 are the parents of deceased- Prasanta Kumar Sahoo. 7. The Appellant-insurer disputed involvement of the offending Truck bearing Regd. No.OR-02-C-6097 in the accident. Their case is that the accident took place involving one unknown vehicle and at that time, present offending vehicle was standing on road side near the spot in a break-down condition. But the claimants have falsely implicated it in the accident to manage compensation. This is the main ground of challenge in both the appeals. Besides, the insurer had also questioned quantification of compensation amount in favour of the claimants. 8. The claimants have examined three witnesses and seven witnesses respectively in both cases in support of their claim besides relying on the police papers such as, the copy of FIR, seizure list, post- mortem examination report, etc. On the other hand, the insurer MACA Nos.401 & 402 of 2021 Page 4 of 9 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Jan-2024 10:57:03 examined four witnesses on their behalf and insurance particulars of the offending vehicle. 9. The validity of insurance policy of the offending Truck on the date of accident is admitted. The only question remains with regard to involvement of the offending Truck in the accident. 10. The wife of deceased-Ajay Kumar Ranasingh in MACT No.19 of 2005 and sister of deceased Prasant Kumar Sahoo in MACT No.20 of 2005, have stated in their evidence regarding involvement of the offending Truck in the accident. P.W.3 (Amit Kumar Mishra) has stated in his evidence that he earlier worked in the offending Truck as a Helper. But on the date of accident, he did not go in the vehicle and in his place one Kshimanshu Paikray had been in the vehicle as Helper. The vehicle was driven by the driver-Kunja Bihari Baral. This witness has further stated that in the next early morning of the accident, the Helper Kshimanshu informed him over phone that the offending Truck had collided with one Scooter at the given spot causing death of both riders of the Scooter. MACA Nos.401 & 402 of 2021 Page 5 of 9 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Jan-2024 10:57:03 O.P.W.1, namely, Dhaneswar Ranasingh is the informant. He is also the owner of the Scooter. He lodged the FIR on the next morning. He has stated in his evidence that immediately after getting information about the accident in the night, he proceeded to the spot and found that the offending Truck was at the spot and the Scooter was lying on the road in damaged condition. O.P.W.2 is a motor mechanic, O.P.W.3 is the driver of the offending Truck and O.P.W.4 is the owner of the offending Truck. They have all denied involvement of the offending Truck in the accident and as per them the offending Truck was parked at the accident spot in a break-down condition awaiting repair. 11. It needs to be mentioned here that the witnesses have not been properly reflected in the List of Witnesses furnished at the bottom of the impugned award. 12. A thorough perusal of the evidences of all the witnesses reveals that none of them have seen the accident and all are circumstantial witnesses. In such situation, when it is admitted that the offending Truck was parked at the place of accident and the Scooter was lying in MACA Nos.401 & 402 of 2021 Page 6 of 9 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Jan-2024 10:57:03 damaged condition few cubits away from the Truck, in absence of any other cogent material, it can be well presumed, adhering to the principles of preponderance of probability, that the accident took place involving both the vehicles. Here it is submitted by the insurer that the Police upon investigation could not found any clue against the offending Truck for its involvement in the accident and so, the circumstances are in their favour. But I fail to agree with such contention of the insurer. It is for the reason that, first, Police investigation did not deny involvement of any vehicle in the accident, but it merely stated that no clue could be found for specific vehicle. This does not exclude the offending vehicle because any vehicle includes offending vehicle also. Secondly, applying the principle res ipsa loquitor, the involvement and negligence of the part of offending Truck and its driver can very well be attracted in absence of any substantial material to completely exclude the offending Truck from its involvement. As such, this Court agrees with the finding of the learned Tribunal to conclude regarding involvement of the offending Truck in the accident and the negligence on the part of its driver in causing the same. MACA Nos.401 & 402 of 2021 Page 7 of 9 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Jan-2024 10:57:03 13. It is true that death of the deceased persons in the accident is not disputed. For computing compensation amount, learned Tribunal took the age of deceased-Ajay Kumar Ranasingh at 22 years and applied multiplier ‘18’ taking his income at Rs.3000/- per month. Likewise, the age of deceased-Prasanta Kumar Sahoo has been taken at 21 years and his income is fixed at Rs.3500/- per month. Such determination of age and income of the deceased persons are well founded on material evidence which have not been rebutted by the insurer. Learned Tribunal by adding further amount towards loss of consortium and other heads, has determined the respective compensation amounts. Going through the same, it is seen that the Tribunal has not only added the amount towards future prospects and loss of consortium inadequately, but also has granted compensation for some inapplicable heads such as, loss of economical and social stability of the minor son of deceased-Ajay Kumar Ranasingh and towards loss of pleasure to the parents of the unmarried deceased-Prasanta Kumar Sahoo. Further, it is seen that appropriate amount towards loss of future prospects and loss of consortium would be much higher than it is awarded by the Tribunal. But in absence of any challenge from the side of the claimants, I am not inclined to enhance the same. However, taking a MACA Nos.401 & 402 of 2021 Page 8 of 9 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Jan-2024 10:57:03 wholesome view with a balancing approach, it is seen that the amounts of compensation are falling very nearer to just compensation and as such, the amounts awarded by the Tribunal are left undisturbed. 14. In the result, both the appeals are dismissed and the Appellant- insurer is directed to deposit the respective amounts of compensation in both the cases as per the direction of the learned Tribunal contained in the impugned awards, including interest, within a period of four months from today, which shall be disbursed in favour of respective claimants on such terms and proportions as contained in the impugned awards. (B.P. Routray) Judge B.K. Barik/Secretary MACA Nos.401 & 402 of 2021 Page 9 of 9