Allowed

Jharana Behera v. Chandramani Behera

Orissa HC14 Mar 2023MACA/208/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Oriassa, while hearing an appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal judgment, set aside the Tribunal's direction granting the insurer a right of recovery against the owner. The Court found the insurer liable as the driver held a valid license valid on the date of the accident.

What did the court decide?

Direction to insurer to pay compensation; right of recovery set aside; certificate proceedings against owner dropped.

Jharana Behera Vs Chandramani Behera — Motor Accident Claims | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK MACA No.208 of 2010

¶2

Jharana Behera

¶3

…. Appellant Mr. B.N. Samantaray, Advocate

¶4

-versus-

¶5

Chandramani Behera and others …. Respondents

¶6

Mr. G.P. Dutta, Advocate for Respondent No.4

¶7

. CORAM: JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY

ORDER

14.03.2023

Order No.

Heard Mr. B.N. Samantaray, learned counsel for the Appellantowner as well as Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel for the Respondent No.4-Insurance Company.

¶13

Present appeal by the owner is directed against the judgment dated 10.8.2009 of learned 1^st M.A.C.T., Cuttack in M.A.C. No.105 of 2006, wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.1,62,900/- has been granted along with interest @7.5% per annum to the claimants from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 4.4.2006 on account of death of the deceased in the motor vehicular accident dated 26.3.2006.

¶14

Learned Tribunal while directing for payment of compensation by the insurer has further granted right of recovery in favour of the insurer on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle, i.e. Bolero bearing Registration No.OR-05-W-1319 did not have valid license to drive the passengers service vehicle.

¶15

It is seen that as per the driving license produced under Ext.9, the driver was authorized to drive light motor vehicle, valid on

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

the date of accident. Therefore, any such observation of the learned Tribunal that the insurer is not liable to pay the compensation amount is set aside being found inappropriate. Accordingly, the right of recovery granted by the learned Tribunal in favour of the insurer is also set aside.

¶18

Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel for the Respondent No.4insurer fairly submits that the insurer has already satisfied the award amount.

¶19

Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of with aforesaid observations and the direction of the learned Tribunal with regard to granting right of recovery in favour of the insurer is set aside.

¶20

It is further directed that if any certificate proceeding has been initiated against the owner, as intimated by Mr. B.N. Samantaray, learned counsel for the owner, shall be dropped with immediate effect.

¶21

An urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶22

( B.P. Routray)

¶23

Judge

¶24

B.K. Barik

¶25

Page 2 of 2

Jharana Behera v. Chandramani Behera

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jharana Behera v. Chandramani Behera

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sk.Rustam Vs Balaram Padhi

Basanti Sahoo Vs Sabitarani Mohapatra

Soumyakanta Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Divisional Manager,Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Rasonara Begum

N.I.Co.Ltd Vs Mansingh Hansda

N.I.a.Co.Ltd Vs Debaraj Dash