Professional Documents
Culture Documents
(Arising from final Judgment dated 16/9/2009 Passed by the High Court of
Orissa at Cuttack in MACA 284/2007)
VRS
PAPER-BOOK
PETETIONER
INDEX
10.7.1998 The petitioner filled a claim case as per MV Act before 1st
26.3.2007 the Petitioner filled a appeal before the Orissa High Court
No-284/2007
MACA NO 284/2007
Code No 070100
In the matter of:-
An application under sec 173(2) of the moter vehicle Act
And
In the matter of:-
Bata Krishna Panda, aged about 38 years
S/o Khalli Panda, Advocate by profession
at-LIC Colony, Po/Ps-Bhanjanagar, Dt-Ganjam … Appellant
(claimant in the lower court)
Versus
1 Ajait Kumar Panda,S/o Sitaram Panda
(owner of trekker OR 02C 5847)
Landai Sahi, At/Po Bhejiput
Ps Bhanjanagar, Dt-ganjam
2 The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd
Represented by its Divisional Manager
Station Road, At/Po/Ps-Berhampur
District Ganjam … …. … Respondents
(sl No 1 and 2 were the opp party in lower court)
16/9/2009
This appeal by the claimant is directed against the
judgment / award dated 18.12.2006pased by the 4th MACT Bhanjanagar
Ganjam in MAC 243of 2003 awarding an amount of Rs 35,000/-as
compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of
the claim application. The claimant –appellant seeks enhancement of the
compensation amount
Learned counsel for the claimant-appellant submits that
all the requisite documents including the medical papers, such as
prescriptions medicine bills, injury report and disability certificate having
been filled in support of the injuries sustained by him in the accident and
the expenses incurred for treatment of such injuries, learned tribunal erred
for ignoring the same and passing the impugned award. In this regard it is
submitted that as the injury report (ext 14) clearly revealed that the injured
Claimants sustained lacerated injuries and fracture of shaft right tibia,
which is grievous in nature, the award of compensation amount is wholly
inadequate, unjust and improper. It is further submitted that the learned
tribunal has not taken in to consideration the nature of injury sustained and
the extend of disability suffered by the claimant, for assessing the
pecuniary and non pecuniary damages, while passing the impugned award.
it is further submitted that as the injured claimant sustained disability due to
shortening of right leg by 2 ½” which amount 60% disability, which is a
permanent in nature, the same has not been taken in to consideration by
the learned Tribunal, While assessing the compensation amount payable.
Accordingly it is submitted that the award of compensation amount is
wholly inadequate and not commensurate with the injuries sustained by the
claimant.
Learned counsel for the insurer-respondent no-2 while
supporting the impugned award, submit that there being no cogent and
credible documentary evidence on record to show the actual nature of
injuries sustained by the injured claimants and the extend of disability
suffered by him due to such injury, the impugned award cannot be faulted
On a perusal of impugned award it is seen that the injury report
on police requisition (ext 14) reveals that the injured claimant sustained
lacerated injury as well as fracture of right tibia which was grievous in
nature. the disability certificate (ext 5), the veracity of which was doubted
by the learned Tribunal shows that due to such injury the claimant had
suffered disability to the extend of 60%, further it is seen that the claimant
had filed prescription (ext 6 series) and Medicine bills (ext 7 series) in
support of expenses incurred by him for treatment of injuries
Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the
parties and keeping in view the nature and extend of in juries sustained by
the claimant and the disability suffered by him, I feel the interest of justice
would be best served if a further consolidated amount of Rs 25,000/- is
awarded to the claimant as compensation on which no interest is payable.
The impugned award is modified to the said extend
The insurance company respondent No-2 is directed to deposit
the further consolidated compensation amount of Rs 25,000/- with the
learned Tribunal with in six weeks from today
MACA is accordingly disposed of
SD/- S.C Parija. J
True copy
Position of parties
In the High Court In this Court
BETWEEN:-
IN THE MATTER OF
Bata Krishna Panda
aged about 41years
S/o Sri Khall Panda,
Advocate by profession
At-LIC Colony,Po/PS- Bhanjanagar,
Ganjam, Orissa
(Petitioner in Court Below) Petitioner Petitioner
VRS
1 Ajit Kumar panda,
S/o Sitaram Panda
(owner of trekker OR-02C 5847
Landai Sahi, Po Bhejiputa,
Ps-Bhanjanagar, Ganjam, Orissa Opp Patry-1 Respondent 1
2 The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd
Represented by it Divisional Manager,
At/Po/Ps -Berhampur, Ganjam Opp Party-2 Respondent 2
To
Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India and His Companion Judges of the
2. QUESTIONS OF LAW :
I weather the High Court Rightly not decided all the questions
appeal
and for the said disability the award made by High Court and
Tribunal justified
has been filed by him against the impugned judgment and order dated
16/9/2009
The petitioner states that the annexure produced with the SLP are
records of the case in the Court below against whose order the leave
5. GROUNDS:
month from profession and agriculture and age was 29 year old
B. For that while decide the case neither the Tribunal nor the High
1989
C. For that the High court only enhanced a Rs 25,000/- with out
too low and unjustified as per law and principle laid down by
this Hon’able court time to time, the petitioner want to draw kind
MAD] which are very much similar with the fact of case and
D. For that also both the Tribunal and High courts committed a
the High Court awarded any amount for said expenses while
H. For that the petitioner spent Rs 10,000/- for diet and other
I. For that due to fracture in right leg the petitioner could not able
to move for one year due to plaster and post plaster problem
which was highly affected his normal conjugal life and For that
para-15)
J. For that as the petitioner could not able to do his normal duty
ACC 92 Para-17
K. For that the Tribunal and High Court also committed a error by
vide exhibit -5 and the said document was also proofed by oral
of High Court, Cuttack, The said order of high Court was arose
from the said order of civil Judge (SD) Bhanjanagar which was
are not party in that suit). The Civil judge while passed that
order no evidence was adduced except filing of the disability
earlier
7. MAIN PRARYER:
It is there fore humbly prayed that this Hon’able court may graciously
be pleased to grant the special leave to Appeal against the final judgment
with a 12% interest from the date of filling of the claim case in the interest
of justice
8. INTERIM RELIEF:
Drawn on 6/12/2009
CERTIFICATE:
Certified that the Special Leave petition is confined only to the pleadings before the High
Court whose order is challenged and the other documents relied upon in those proceeding. No
additional fact/documents or ground have been taken herein or relied upon in the Special Leave
petition. It is further certified that the copies of the documents /annexure attached to the Special
Leave petition are necessary to answer the questions of law raised in the petition or to make out
grounds urged in the Special Leave petition for consideration of this Hon’ble Court. This
certificate is given on the instruction of the petitioner whose affidavit is filed with the special
leave petition.
PETITIONER
In the Supreme Court of India
(Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)
DEPONENT
Seal and signature of notary
True copy