Disposed¶37

Ashok Kumar Das v. Sk.Rafique

Orissa HC6 Aug 2025MACA/887/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Enhancement of motor accident compensation; appeal under Section 173 Motor Vehicles Act 1988; MACA No.887 of 2005; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; Justice V. Narasingh; condonation of delay of two years; I.A No.1103 of 2006; 2nd M.A.C.T Cuttack Misc. Case No.637 of 1993; claimant aged about 9 years with fracture of right hand and multiple injuries; vehicle OR-05-A-0687; Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.; Sk. Rafique; additional consolidated award of Rs.10,000/-; doctrine of just compensation; loss of future prospects; disposal without costs.

What did the court decide?

Delay in filing the appeal condoned; a further consolidated sum of Rs.10,000/- awarded to the Claimant in addition to the impugned award, payable by the Insurance Company within eight weeks; court fees payable by the Claimant as per Rules; MACA disposed of with no costs.

Ashok Kumar Das Vs Sk.Rafique — Motor Accident Claims | Orissa HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK MACA No.887 of 2005

¶2

In the matter of an application under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

¶3

Ashok Kumar Das ….

¶4

Appellant

¶5

-versus-

¶6

1.Sk. Rafique 2.Oriental Insurance …. Co. Ltd. Respondents

¶7

For Appellant : Mr. S. Mohanty, Advocate

¶8

For Respondents : Mr. N.B. Das, Advocate (R-2)

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

¶10

Date of hearing : 06.08.2025 Date of Judgment : 06.08.2025

¶11

V. Narasingh, J. I.A No.1103 of 2006

¶12

1. This application has been filed at the instance of Appellant-Claimant seeking condonation of delay of 2 years in preferring this MACA.

¶13

2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties

¶14

and considering the recitals in the I.A, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

¶15

3. I.A is accordingly disposed of.

¶16

Page 1 of 4

¶17

MACA No.887 of 2005

¶18

1. Heard learned counsel for the AppellantClaimant and learned counsel for the Insurance Company.

¶19

2. The Appellant–Claimant assailing the judgment dated 8.8.2003 passed by the learned 2nd M.A.C.T, Cuttack in Misc. Case No.637 of 1993 awarding a compensation of Rs.25,000/- to the Claimant with interest at the rate of 6% per annum has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation amount.

¶20

3. The Appellant as Claimant filed the aforesaid M.A.C Case claiming compensation of Rs.40,000/- on account of the injury sustained by him while travelling in the offending vehicle bearing registration number OR-05-A-0687. In such claim application, the owner of the offending truck was set ex parte. Respondent No.2Insurance Company was Opposite Party No.2 appeared and filed its written statement opposing the claim.

¶21

4. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed;

¶22

“1. Are the claims maintainable ?

¶23

2.Whether the petitioners sustained injuries due to the rash and negligent driving of the vehicle bearing registration number OR-05-A-0687 bus by its driver ?

¶24

Page 2 of 4

¶25

If the petitioners are entitled to get any compensation and if so, to what extent and from whom ?

¶26

To what relief, if any, are the petitioners entitled to ?”

¶27

In order to substantiate his stand, Claimant examined himself as P.W.1, another injured examined as P.W.3 and one independent witness as P.W.2 and three documents were exhibited and marked as Exts.1 to 3.

¶28

Neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the Insurance Company

¶29

On consideration of the materials on record, learned Tribunal directed for payment of compensation of Rs.25,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% from 22.2.1996 till realization.

¶30

5. Learned counsel for the Appellant, Mr. Mohanty submits that the learned Tribunal erred in law in awarding a sum of Rs.25,000/- which is abysmally low though the Claimant who was aged about 9 years old and sustained fracture of right hand and multiple injuries on his person due to the accident and shifted to hospital for treatment and he had undergone treatment by incurring medical expenses. Since learned Tribunal has not, inter alia, properly considered the loss of future prospects, the impugned award is liable to be set aside.

¶31

6. Such submission is opposed by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company, inter alia, on the

¶32

Page 3 of 4

¶33

ground that if the impugned judgment is evaluated on the touchstone of the doctrine of just compensation, the same does not merit any interference.

¶34

7. Considering the facts and the submissions made, this Court is of the considered view that award of further consolidated amount of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) in addition to the amount as per the impugned award would subserve the ends of justice.

¶35

Accordingly, this Court directs the Insurance Company to pay a further consolidated sum of Rs.10,000/- to the Claimant within a period of eight weeks hence.

¶36

8. Court fees shall be payable by the Claimant as per Rules.

¶37

9. Accordingly, the MACA stands disposed of. No costs.

¶38

Orissa High Court, Cuttack Dated the 06^th August, 2025/Pradeep

¶39

Signature Not Verified

¶40

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRADEEP KUMAR SWAIN Designation: Assistant Registrar-cum-Senior Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 18-Aug-2025 18:36:45

¶41

Page 4 of 4

Ashok Kumar Das v. Sk.Rafique

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar Das v. Sk.Rafique

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Laxmidhar Sahoo Vs Binod Bihari Prusty

B.M.,N.I.a.Co.Ltd. Vs Sabitri Jhadia

Sritam Rath Vs State of Odisha

T.Satish Rao Vs State of Odisha

N.I.a.Co.Ltd Vs Budhani Mohanta

Sujit Sahu Vs State of Odisha