Remanded

Gava Pradhan v. Pramoda Ku.Lenka

Orissa HC25 Sept 2025MACA/947/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Claimants appealed dismissal of their motor accident death claim; the High Court found the Tribunal's rejection unsatisfactory and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication with opportunity to adduce further evidence, directing disposal within six months.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; appeal disposed of, matter remitted to Tribunal for fresh adjudication from stage of evidence; parties to appear on 08.10.2025; no costs.

Gava Pradhan Vs Pramoda Ku.Lenka — Motor Accident Claims | Orissa HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

MACA No.947 of 2015

¶3

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

¶4

1. Gava Pradhan

¶5

2. Dasarathi Pradhan …. Appellants

¶6

-versus-

¶7

1.Pramoda Kumar Lenka 2.New India Assurance …. Co. Ltd. Respondents

¶8

For Appellants : Mr. P.C. Pattnaik, Advocate

¶9

For Respondents : Mr. N.C. Mohanty, Advocate (R-2)

¶10

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

¶11

Date of hearing : 20.08.2025 Date of Judgment : 25.09.2025

¶12

V. Narasingh, J. Heard learned counsel for the Appellants-

¶13

Claimants and learned counsel for the Insurance Company.

¶14

2. The Claimants have filed this appeal challenging the judgment dated 24.03.2015 passed by the learned 4^th MACT, Puri in MAC No.481 of 1995

¶15

Page 1 of 5

¶16

whereby learned Tribunal has dismissed the claim application as not maintainable.

¶17

3. The case of the Claimant is that on 13.12.1995 while the deceased was going from Dasapalla to Nayagarh in the extreme left side of the road by walking near Bakalbandha the offending vehicle bearing registration number OR-02-B-3102 came from Dasapalla side in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased as a result of the offending vehicle capsized. Thereafter, the deceased was taken to the hospital for treatment but later on he succumbed to the said injuries. As such claim application was filed claiming a compensation of Rs.1,75,000/-.

¶18

In response to the notice, the Insurance Company appeared before the learned Tribunal and resisted the claim. The owner of the offending vehicle was set ex parte. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed:

¶19

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

¶20

“i. Is the claim application maintainable ? ii. Whether on 13.8.95 at 3 P.M the petitioner met accident with bus bearing registration No.OR-02B-3102 (truck) and sustained injuries ?

¶21

iii. Was the driver of the offending vehicle rash and negligent in causing the accident?

¶22

Page 2 of 5

¶23

iv. Is the petitioner entitled to get compensation, if so, to what extent and from which O.P?

¶24

v. To what other relief the applicants are entitled?”

¶25

In order to substantiate his stand, one of the Claimants examined himself as P.W.1 and two independent witnesses as P.Ws.2 and 3 and nine documents were exhibited and marked as Exts.1 to 9.

¶26

Neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the Respondents.

¶27

5. On consideration of the evidence on record, learned Tribunal dismissed the claim application by disbelieving the evidence adduced by them. 6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Claimants that the learned Tribunal has committed gross error in awarding nil award which is against the cannons of justice and equity. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal having failed to appreciate the final form vide Ext.1 and 161 statements vide Ext.5 and the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 in its proper perspective that the deceased was a pedestrian and died due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle which resulted in passing of the impugned award and therefore, the same is liable to be set aside.

¶28

Page 3 of 5

¶29

He further submitted that the deceased was working as a Mason and aged about 45 years and was earning Rs.2200/- per month. Learned Tribunal ought to have calculated the same and applying the appropriate multiplier ought to have awarded the compensation. Since the same has not been done, the impugned award is liable to be set aside.

¶30

7. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company supported the impugned award. 8. This Court perused the depositions of the P.Ws. 1 to 3, final report and Ext. Nos. 5 to 8 (statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C) taken on record at the behest of the Claimant- Appellants. Considering the materials and evidence on record and keeping in view the benevolent nature of legislation, in the interest of justice, the impugned order is set aside. The appeal is disposed of, remitting the matter back to the learned Tribunal for fresh adjudication. The parties present before this court are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 08.10.2025 along with certified copy of this judgment.

¶31

Learned Tribunal shall proceed from the stage of evidence and consider the case in accordance with law after giving opportunity to both the parties to adduce further evidence if deemed just and proper to fortify their respective stand.

¶32

Page 4 of 5

¶33

The learned Tribunal shall make an endeavour for disposal of the claim application within a period of six months from the date of appearance of the parties.

¶34

9. The MACA is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶35

(V. NARASINGH) Judge

¶36

Orissa High Court, Cuttack Dated the 25^th September, 2025/Pradeep

¶37

Signature Not Verified

¶38

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRADEEP KUMAR SWAIN Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cutt ack Date: 30-Sep-2025 13:06:12

¶39

Page 5 of 5

Gava Pradhan v. Pramoda Ku.Lenka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gava Pradhan v. Pramoda Ku.Lenka

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

A.Trinath Rao Vs a.Buchaya Chatty

Gayadhar Biswal Vs State and Ors.

Ramakanta Malik Vs State and Anr.

Bajaj Allianz Gen.in Vs Niranjan Pattnaik

Pabitra Rout @ Papu Vs State of Odisha

Chita Ranjan Nayak @ Kuna Vs State of Odisha