Point of Law : Motor Vehicle - Accident - seeking enhancement of the award amount - Liability of insurance company - since the Insurance Appeal was mostly involving an attempt to reduce the compensation while entertaining such appeals, the High Court should remain careful and looking to the limited challenge issue direction for at least release of 75% of the compensation amount along with interest to protect the interest of the bereaved family. Release of balance amount may be subject to final outcome involving litigation in this Court.

JUDGMENT :

Biswanath Rath, J.

MACA No.593 of 2016 is at the instance of the Claimants seeking enhancement of the award amount involving judgment in MAC No.113 of 2011, whereas MACA No.774 of 2016 is at the instance of the Insurance Company involved herein involving the same judgment involving both computation aspect as well as calculation of future prospects.

2. For the common facts involving both the Appeals, on single hearing of both sides further on consent of both learned counsel for the Parties, the same are decided by this common judgment.

3. Background involving the case is that the Claimants being the legal heirs claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.32,00,000/-on account of death of the deceased on a vehicular accident caused by the offending Truck bearing Regn. No.AP-05-TT-5665 on 15.12.2010 on N.H.5 in the Balugaon Bazaar. The Claimants further pleaded that on 15.12.2010 at about 8 P.M. when the deceased was proceeding to perform his duty by a bicycle on left side of the road near Balugaon Bazaar on N.H.5 the offending Truck came in high speed also in rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased from his backside. Said vehicle ran over him resulting death of the deceased at the spot itself. Postmortem was also conducted. There is material that the cause of death was accident. On the premises that the deceased was hardly 39 years of age and being engaged as a Technician, Grade-I (Elect/Traction Distribution) under the East Coast Railways, Khurda Road and was earning salary of Rs.24,315/-per month at the relevant point of time, the claim petition was put up claiming Rs.32,00,000/-. The Owner of the registered vehicle did not contest the proceeding and set ex parte. Opposite Party No.2, the Insurance Company therein contested the case by filing objection and asking the Claimants to prove the case through documents. The Insurance Company also contested the case on the premises that they are not liable to pay compensation.

4. Based on the pleading, the Tribunal framed the following Issues :

(I) Whether due to rash and (or) negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle bearing registration no.AP-05-TT-5665 the accident took place and in that accident the deceased, Late S.Jagadeswara Achary, succumbed to injuries ?

(II) Whether the petitioners are entitled to get the compensation. If so, what would be the extent ?

(III) Whether both the Opposite Parties or either of them are/is liable to pay the compensation ? and

(IV) To what relief(s), if any, the petitioners are entitled to ?”

5. The Claimants to satisfy their case examined two witnesses. Opposite Party No.2 examined none. Claimants exhibited Exts.1 to 18 to support their case, whereas the Insurance Company, Opposite Party No.2 therein exhibited Exts.A to F. Based on the pleading, the evidence as well as the material support and the submissions of both the Claimants and the Insurance Company, the 1st Additional District Judge-cum-1st M.A.C.T., Cuttack (herein after called as “Tribunal”) after holding all the Issues in favour of the Claimants allowed the Claim Case ex parte against Opposite Party No.1 therein and on contest against Opposite Party No.2, the Appellant herein thereby directing the Insurance Company to pay compensation of Rs.49,83,355/-with simple interest @ 7% per annum with effect from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e., 5.3.2011 along with cost of Rs.1000/-, however giving right to recover from the registered owner of the offending vehicle.

In the said order, the Tribunal also adopted a pattern to utilize the compensation amount in a manner keeping in view the best interest of the Claimants. It is needless to submit here answering Issue Nos.II to IV, the Tribunal has come to hold that there was valid insurance covering the accident but there remains a doubt on the validity of the Driving Licence on the date of accident for non-cooperation of the Driver and thus the direction also contained a scope for right to recovery.

6. Con