Partly allowed

Laxmipriya Nayak v. Ayas Khan

Orissa HC10 Feb 2023MACA/462/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Orissa allowed an appeal where the learned Tribunal granted compensation. The court found no infirmity in the quantum but, considering the claimant was treated as an indoor patient, ordered an additional consolidated sum of Rs.10,000 to be deposited by the Insurance Company.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.2-Insurance Company to deposit a further consolidated sum of Rs.10,000 before the learned Tribunal within two months.

Laxmipriya Nayak Vs Ayas Khan — Motor Accident Claims | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

MACA No.462 of 2019

¶3

Laxmipriya Nayak

¶4

…. Appellant Mr. K.C. Nayak, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

…. Ayas Khan and another Respondents Mr. B.C. Singh, Advocate for Respondent No.2

¶7

CORAM: JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY

ORDER

10.02.2023

Order No.

Heard Mr. K.C. Nayak, learned counsel for the Appellantclaimant as well as Mr. B.C. Singh, learned counsel for Respondent No.2-Insurance Company.

¶13

Present appeal by the claimant is directed against judgment dated 9.7.2019 of the learned 1^st MACT, Jajpur in M.A.C. No.229 of 2016, wherein learned Tribunal has granted compensation to the tune of Rs.85,200/- along with interest @6% per annum to the claimant from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 26.12.2016 on account of injuries sustained by her in the motor vehicular accident dated 23.10.2016.

¶14

Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the injured-claimant submits that the injured sustained fracture injuries in her left forearm and in the middle finger of the left forearm. But the injured being a woman was unable to produce her treatment papers though the fact remains that she has been treated as an indoor patient.

¶15

Page 1 of 2

¶16

It is seen that the claimant could not able to produce any document regarding her treatment except injury report. The learned Tribunal considering the medicine bills produced by the claimant has granted Rs.25,114/- towards medical expenses, Rs.40,000/- for pain and suffering and Rs.20,000/- for composite damages, thereby totaling to Rs.85,114/-, rounded to Rs.85,000/-. I do not see any infirmity in the approach of the learned Tribunal to quantify the compensation amount. However, considering the submissions as advanced by Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the Appellant that the injured underwent treatment as an indoor patient, a further consolidated sum of Rs.10,000/- is granted.

¶17

In the result, the appeal is disposed of with a direction to Respondent No.2-Insurance Company to deposit the further consolidated sum of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) before learned Tribunal within a period of two moths from today, which shall be disbursed in favour of the claimant-Appellant.

¶18

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

¶19

( B.P. Routray) Judge

¶20

B.K. Barik

¶21

Page 2 of 2

Laxmipriya Nayak v. Ayas Khan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxmipriya Nayak v. Ayas Khan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manager Tp Claims,Iffco-Tokio G.I.Co.Ltd Vs Ramamani Pradhan

Dr.Kishori Dash Vs Purushottam Edu. and Welfare

Nirupama Pradhan Vs Bidyadhar Mandal

U.I.I.Co.Ltd Vs Sushama Patjoshi

Basudev Panda Vs Union of India

Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Pradip Ku.Sahu