SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(ORI) 1348

ORISSA HIGH COURT
RASHMI RANJAN PARIDA – Appellant
Versus
GYANENDRA JENA – Respondent


ORDER

08.04.2024 09. 1. Heard Mr. Das, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.

Dutta, learned counsel for respondent No.2 Insurance Company.

2. None appears for respondent No.1.

3. Instant appeal is filed by the claimant appellant challenging the quantum of compensation directed in MAC No.49 of 2019 by 3 rd Additional District Judge-cum-4 th MACT, Cuttack on the grounds stated therein.

4. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the claimant appellant referring to the calculation sheet as at Flag-B claims for enhancement of compensation by sum of Rs.8,87,520/- contending that the disability of the claimant should have been treated as 90% instead and while claiming so, he refers to the following decisions, such as, Mohan Soni Vrs. Ram Avtar Tomar & Others, 2012 (1) TAC 385 (SC) and Rekha Jain Vrs. National Insurance Company Limited 2013 (3) TAC 747 (SC). It is submitted that though the disability is held to be 75% but the functional disability should have been at 100% and if not 90% at least since the claimant appellant suffered amputation of his left leg and sustained loco-motor disability, which is permanent in nature.

5. O

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top