Allowed

Kanaka Baidya v. Oic, Baripada

Orissa HC9 Feb 2023WP(C)/13048/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court disposed of a long-pending Writ Petition challenging a lower Tribunal order directing refund of compensation. The Court held the petitioner was entitled to higher compensation due to the earlier award being set aside at his instance. The impugned order was set aside, and the petitioner was directed to submit an undertaking to return the advance if the final award is lower.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 06.04.2012 set aside. Petitioner directed to submit undertaking to return money or adjust against final award. Lower Tribunal directed to conclude MAC case within two months.

Kanaka Baidya Vs Oic, Baripada — Motor Accident Claims | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.13048 of 2012

¶3

Kanaka Baidya

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

Mr. Gautam Mishra, Sr. Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

….
Oriental Insurance Company, Opposite Parties
Baripada Branch and others
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K.MOHAPATRA
ORDER
09.02.2023
Order No.
06. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner.

¶8

Although notice was issued to Opposite Party No.1, on a perusal of the Office Note, it appears that the A.D. has been received back after valid service. None appears for the Insurance Company. Therefore, this Court after taking into consideration that the matter is pending since 2012, deems it proper to adjudicate the matter in the absence of Opposite Party No.1 and dispose of the matter finally.

¶9

The present Writ Petition has been filed by the ClaimantPetitioner challenging the order dated 06.04.2012 under Annexure-3 passed by the 3^rd MACT, Bargarh. The 3^rd MACT, Bargarh in MAC

¶10

Page 1 of 2

¶11

// 2 //

¶12

No.83 of 2007 has directed the Petitioner to refund the compensation amount of Rs.30,000/- which he has already received from the Opposite Party No.1-Insurance Company.

¶13

The Petitioner as the Claimant filed a claim application before the 3^rd MACT, Bargarh. The 3^rd MACT Bargarh after adjudication disposed of the case by awarding Rs.60,000/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till the date of payment. Being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation, the claimant-Petitioner approached this Court by filing an appeal bearing MACA No.63 of 2011. This Court vide order dated 23.08.2011 disposed of the appeal by setting aside the award and the matter was remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication. Prior to that the Opposite Party No.1 has already paid a sum of Rs.30,000/- to the Petitioner.

¶14

After the matter was remanded to the 3^rd MACT, Bargarh for fresh adjudication, the 3^rd MACT, Bargarh vide order dated 06.04.2012 under Annexure-3 directed the Claimant-Petitioner to deposit the awarded amount of Rs.30,000/- which he has already received before the Tribunal from the Opposite Party No.1.

¶15

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted before this Court that a total sum of Rs.60,000/- was awarded and the award was set aside at the instance of the Petitioner as the same was at the lower side. Accordingly, the matter was remanded back to the Tribunal. Although two Insurance Companies are involved in the transaction, only Oriental Insurance Company, Opposite Party No.1 paid a sum of Rs.30,000/- to the claimant-Petitioner and the Bajaj Allianz, G.I.C., Company Limited Opposite Party No.4 has not paid a sum of Rs.30,000/- which he is supposed to pay to the Petitioner.

¶16

Page 2 of 3

¶17

// 3 //

¶18

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, this Court is of the considered view that the award was set aside by this Court as the same was on lower side. Therefore, the Petitioner is entitled to higher compensation amount subject to fresh adjudication by the 3^rd MACT, Bargarh. Further, the matter is pending since 2012 and by virtue of the impugned order passed by this Court, the proceeding before the 3^rd MACT, Bargarh has been stalled. Taking into consideration the aforesaid fact, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition directing the Petitioner to submit an undertaking before the Tribunal to the effect that he shall return the money once finally the award is passed or the same may be adjusted against the awarded amount to be passed by the Tribunal after adjudicating the matter finally.

¶19

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 06.04.2012 is hereby set aside. Learned Tribunal is directed to expedite the MAC case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶20

With the aforesaid direction/observation, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶21

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

¶22

RKS

¶23

Page 3 of 3

Kanaka Baidya v. Oic, Baripada

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanaka Baidya v. Oic, Baripada

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

Chhabirani Rath Vs State

Bhagyalaxmi S.H.G. Vs Collector and DM

Balaram Das Vs State of Odisha and or

Niranjana Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Dibya Lochana Behera Vs State and Ors.

Raquibul Warish Vs State and Ors.