Allowed

Bishnu Priya Baral v. Manas Ranjan Swain

Orissa HC5 Jul 2023MACA/454/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court held that an insurance policy covering legal liability for three persons employed in a vehicle includes an additional driver. Consequently, it ordered the insurer to pay enhanced compensation along with interest, adding an amount for parental consortium to the minor children of the deceased.

What did the court decide?

Ordered the insurer to pay Rs.13,24,000 along with interest @6% per annum from the date of filing the claim application within two months.

Bishnu Priya Baral Vs Manas Ranjan Swain — Motor Accident Claims | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

MACA No.538 of 2020 & MACA No.454 of 2020

¶3

(From the order dated 24^th February, 2020 passed by the 3^rd Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar, in M.A.C. Case No.3289 of 2014)

¶4

¶5

MACA No.538 of 2020

¶6

IFFICO-TOKIO General Insurance Co. Ltd. …… Appellant
Versus
Bishnu Priya Baral and others ….… Respondents
Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-
For Appellant : Mr.A.A.Khan, Advocate
For Respondents : Mr.P.K.Mishra, Advocate
(For Respondent No.1 to 5)
AND
MACA No.454 of 2020
Bishnu Priya Baral and others …… Appellants
Versus
Manas Ranjan Swain and another ….… Respondents

¶7

Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-

¶8

For Appellants : Mr.P.K.Mishra, Advocate Signature Not Verified For Respondents : Mr.A.A.Khan, Advocate Digitally Signed Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL (For Respondent No.2)

¶9

Digitally Signed Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 06-Jul-2023 18:30:26

¶10

Page 1 of 5

¶11

MACA No.538 of 2020 & MACA No.454 of 2020

¶12

CORAM : JUSTICE B.P. ROUTRAY

¶13

JUDGMENT 5^th July, 2023

¶14

B.P. Routray,J.

¶15

Heard Mr.Khan, learned counsel for the Insurance Company i.e. IFFCO-TOKIO General Insurance Co. Ltd. and Mr.Mishra, learned counsel for the Claimants.

¶16

It is submitted that during pendency of the appeal claimant no.5, namely Basant Baral in MACA No.454 of 2020 and Respondent No.6 in MACA No.538 of 2020, died on 7^th November 2021 and as such, it is prayed to delete his name since all other L.Rs are already on record.

¶17

Both the appeals arise out of the same judgment dated 24^th February, 2020 passed by the learned 3^rd M.A.C.T., Bhubaneswar in M.A.C. Case No.3289 of 2014, wherein compensation to tune of Rs.12,04,000/- along with interest @7% per annum has been granted from the date of filing of the claim application on account of death of the deceased in the motor vehicular accident dated 15^th April, 2014.

¶18

It is submitted by Mr.Khan on behalf of the Insurer that legal liability for the deceased is not covered as per the terms of Insurance Policy and so, the Insurer is not liable to indemnify the compensation amount. It is further submitted that the deceased, namely,

¶19

Signature Not VerifiedTrinath Baral was travelling in the offending Eichar Van bearing Digitally SignedSigned by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWALRegistration No.OD-07B-7752 as an additional driver in addition to one Designation: Secretary Reason: AuthenticationLocation: Orissa High Court, CuttackMan as Chandra Jena, the driver of the said vehicle, who also died in the Date: 06-Jul-2023 18:30:26

¶20

Page 2 of 5

¶21

MACA No.538 of 2020 & MACA No.454 of 2020

¶22

same accident. The Workmen Compensation Case was filed by the L.Rs of said Manas Chandra Jena and award was made in their favour.

¶23

On the other hand, MACA No.454 of 2020 has been filed by the claimants praying for enhancement of the compensation amount on the ground that no amount towards parental consortium has been granted to the children.

¶24

First dealing with the objection raised on behalf of the Insurer, it is relevant to refer the conditions of the policy. As per the copy of the policy under Ext.B, premium for legal liability, as per IMT 28, has been paid for three persons @Rs.50/- for one person. IMT 28 specifies legal liability for the driver, conductor and cleaner employed in connection with operation of the vehicle, in respect of personal injury or death.

¶25

In the instant case, the admitted position remains that the deceased Trinath Baral was employed as an additional driver in the offending vehicle along with other deceased, namely, Manas Chandra Jena. It also remains admitted that at the time of accident Manas Chandra Jena was on wheels and Trinath Baral was in the cabin. Admittedly, the Insurance Company has received premium of Rs.150 for three persons towards legal liability. The status of the deceased as an additional driver is admitted and he was inside the vehicle though Manas Chandra Jena was on the driver seat. No other person except two deceased persons was present in the vehicle. So as an employee of the Signature Not Verifiedvehicle, legal liability in respect of the deceased is covered in terms of Digitally Signed Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWALthe Insurance Policy since the premium for three persons employed in Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, CuttackDate: 06-Jul-2023 18:30:26Date: 06-Jul-2023 18:30:26 con nect ion with the vehicle has been accepted. The vehicle is a goods

¶26

Digitally Signed Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, CuttackDate: 06-Jul-2023 18:30:26Date: 06-Jul-2023 18:30:26 con

¶27

Page 3 of 5

¶28

MACA No.538 of 2020 & MACA No.454 of 2020

¶29

carriage vehicle, where engagement of conductor and cleaner is insignificant. Moreover, engagement of additional driver in long-run goods carriage vehicles is very common. Therefore, the words “Conductor & Cleaner” specified in IMT 28 can be interpreted to include one additional driver employed in connection with the use of vehicle. Thus, the submissions made on behalf of the Insurer that the deceased cannot be treated either as a driver or conductor or cleaner is found unacceptable. Since the legal liability is within the permissible limit of three persons, the employment of the deceased as the additional driver in the vehicle cannot be said as beyond the liability under IMT 28. Hence, the finding of the Tribunal to saddle the liability on the Insurance Company is confirmed.

¶30

Next on the question of quantification of compensation amount, no reason is seen in favour of the Insurance Company to reduce the same, but on the other hand, it is seen that the Tribunal has failed to grant adequate amount towards general damages skipping the amount liable to be added towards loss of parental consortium. There are three minor children of the deceased, who are certainly entitled for parental consortium. Adding Rs.1,20,000/- on that count, the compensation amount is enhanced to Rs.13,24,000/-, payable along with interest @6% per annum.

¶31

In the result, the appeals are disposed of with a direction to the Insurer i.e. IFFCO-TOKIO General Insurance Co. Ltd. to deposit the compensation amount of Rs.13,24,000/-(Thirteen lakh twenty four Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed thousand) along with interest @6% per annum from the date of filing of Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication the claim application within a period of two months from today, which Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 06-Jul-2023 18:30:26

¶32

Page 4 of 5

¶33

MACA No.538 of 2020 & MACA No.454 of 2020

¶34

shall be disbursed in favour of the claimants, except claimant-Appellant No.5, in MACA No.454 of 2020. The direction for payment of penal interest @8% is waived.

¶35

The statutory deposit made by the Appellant in MACA No.538 of 2020 along with accrued interest thereon be refunded to him on proper application and on production of proof of deposit of the award amount before the learned Tribunal.

¶36

The copies of policy as produced by in course of hearing
are kept on record.

¶37

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
(B.P. Routray)
Judge

¶38

C.R.Biswal, Secy.

¶39

Signature Not Verified

¶40

Digitally Signed Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 06-Jul-2023 18:30:26

¶41

Page 5 of 5

¶42

MACA No.538 of 2020 & MACA No.454 of 2020

Bishnu Priya Baral v. Manas Ranjan Swain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bishnu Priya Baral v. Manas Ranjan Swain

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

O.I.Co.Ltd Vs Sailabala Pradhan

Prashant Ku.Meher Vs Dhurba Ch.Nayak andANR

Keshari Swain and Ors. Vs D.M.,O.I.Co.Ltd.

Union of India Vs Tasil Minja

The Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Laxmipriya Parida @ Sarojini Parida

Divisional Manager,Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Kabitanjali Sahu