IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION S.L.P. (Civil) No.................... of 2009 (Arising from final Judgment dated 16/9/2009 Passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in MACA 284/2007) IN THE MATER OF: Bata Krishna Panda … … … Petitioner VRS Ajit Kumar Panda and another … … … Respondent PAPER-BOOK (FOR INDEX KINDLY SEE INSIDE)
23
Embed
In the Supreme Court of India Civil Appellate Jurisdiction s.l.p.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
S.L.P. (Civil) No.................... of 2009
(Arising from final Judgment dated 16/9/2009 Passed by the High Court of
Orissa at Cuttack in MACA 284/2007)
IN THE MATER OF:
Bata Krishna Panda … … … Petitioner
VRS
Ajit Kumar Panda and another … … … Respondent
PAPER-BOOK
(FOR INDEX KINDLY SEE INSIDE)
PETETIONER
INDEX
Sl.No PARTICULARS PAGE NOS1 O/R on limitation A2 List of date B3 Copy of Impugned order /Judgment dated 16/9/2009 Passed by
the Orissa High Court Cuttack in M.A.C.A 284 of 20071 - 2
4 Special Leave Petition With affidavit 3 - 135 Annexure 1 (in a separate attachment)
Copy of judgment 4th M.A.C.T Bhanjanagar in M.A.C 243 of 2003
6 Annexure 2 (in a separate attachment)Copy of Memorandum of appeal before Orissa High Court of MACA 284 0f 2007
SYNOPSIS AND LIST OF DATE (B)
9.3.1998 The petitioner sustained a fracture injury and other injury
by a motor vehicle accident due to rash and negligence
driving of the driver of vehicle vide OR 02C 5847, over
which the local Bhanjanagar Police registered a case U/s
279,338 of IPC vide Ps case No 80/98 out of which the
SDJM Bhanjanagar registered a GR case vide 186 /98
10.7.1998 The petitioner filled a claim case as per MV Act before 1st
MACT Berhampur for of Rs 11 lakhs for pecuniary and
non pecuniary losses such as permanent disability of
shorten of right legs by 2 ½’inches basing upon disability
certificate issued by medical board Ganjam under
guidance of CDMO Berhampur and injury report etc
18.12.2006 The Tribunal only awarded Rs 35,000/- against the said
claim in fever of petitioner with out considering all
evidence available in record
26.3.2007 the Petitioner filled a appeal before the Orissa High Court
at Cuttack against the said order of Tribunal Vida MACA
No-284/2007
16.9.2009 The Orissa High Court Passed final judgment only
enhancing a amount of Rs 25,000/- in lump sum with out
no interest against the claim of Rs 11 lakhs with out
deciding all questions raised by the petitioner
6.12.2009 hence this special leave petition under Article 136 of
Constitution of India against the impugned order dated
16/9/2009 passed in MACA No 284/2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : C U T T A C K(MISCELLANEOUS APPELLATE JURIDICTION)
MACA NO 284/2007Code No 070100
In the matter of:-An application under sec 173(2) of the moter vehicle ActAnd
In the matter of:-Bata Krishna Panda, aged about 38 years S/o Khalli Panda, Advocate by professionat-LIC Colony, Po/Ps-Bhanjanagar, Dt-Ganjam … Appellant(claimant in the lower court)
Versus1 Ajait Kumar Panda,S/o Sitaram Panda
(owner of trekker OR 02C 5847)Landai Sahi, At/Po BhejiputPs Bhanjanagar, Dt-ganjam
2 The Oriental Insurance Co LtdRepresented by its Divisional ManagerStation Road, At/Po/Ps-BerhampurDistrict Ganjam … …. … Respondents(sl No 1 and 2 were the opp party in lower court)
16/9/2009This appeal by the claimant is directed against the
judgment / award dated 18.12.2006pased by the 4th MACT Bhanjanagar
Ganjam in MAC 243of 2003 awarding an amount of Rs 35,000/-as
compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of
the claim application. The claimant –appellant seeks enhancement of the
compensation amount
Learned counsel for the claimant-appellant submits that
all the requisite documents including the medical papers, such as
prescriptions medicine bills, injury report and disability certificate having
been filled in support of the injuries sustained by him in the accident and
the expenses incurred for treatment of such injuries, learned tribunal erred
for ignoring the same and passing the impugned award. In this regard it is
submitted that as the injury report (ext 14) clearly revealed that the injured
Claimants sustained lacerated injuries and fracture of shaft right tibia,
which is grievous in nature, the award of compensation amount is wholly
inadequate, unjust and improper. It is further submitted that the learned
tribunal has not taken in to consideration the nature of injury sustained and
the extend of disability suffered by the claimant, for assessing the
pecuniary and non pecuniary damages, while passing the impugned award.
it is further submitted that as the injured claimant sustained disability due to
shortening of right leg by 2 ½” which amount 60% disability, which is a
permanent in nature, the same has not been taken in to consideration by
the learned Tribunal, While assessing the compensation amount payable.
Accordingly it is submitted that the award of compensation amount is
wholly inadequate and not commensurate with the injuries sustained by the
claimant.
Learned counsel for the insurer-respondent no-2 while
supporting the impugned award, submit that there being no cogent and
credible documentary evidence on record to show the actual nature of
injuries sustained by the injured claimants and the extend of disability
suffered by him due to such injury, the impugned award cannot be faulted
On a perusal of impugned award it is seen that the injury report
on police requisition (ext 14) reveals that the injured claimant sustained
lacerated injury as well as fracture of right tibia which was grievous in
nature. the disability certificate (ext 5), the veracity of which was doubted
by the learned Tribunal shows that due to such injury the claimant had
suffered disability to the extend of 60%, further it is seen that the claimant
had filed prescription (ext 6 series) and Medicine bills (ext 7 series) in
support of expenses incurred by him for treatment of injuries
Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the
parties and keeping in view the nature and extend of in juries sustained by
the claimant and the disability suffered by him, I feel the interest of justice
would be best served if a further consolidated amount of Rs 25,000/- is
awarded to the claimant as compensation on which no interest is payable.
The impugned award is modified to the said extend
The insurance company respondent No-2 is directed to deposit
the further consolidated compensation amount of Rs 25,000/- with the
learned Tribunal with in six weeks from today
MACA is accordingly disposed of
SD/- S.C Parija. J True copy
Bata Krishna Panda Petitioner
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIAOrder XVI, rule 4(1) (a)]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONSPECIALLEAVE PETITION
(Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India)S.L.P. (Civil) No.................... of 2009
Position of partiesIn the High Court In this Court
BETWEEN:-IN THE MATTER OFBata Krishna Panda aged about 41yearsS/o Sri Khall Panda,Advocate by professionAt-LIC Colony,Po/PS- Bhanjanagar,Ganjam, Orissa(Petitioner in Court Below) Petitioner Petitioner
VRS1 Ajit Kumar panda, S/o Sitaram Panda (owner of trekker OR-02C 5847 Landai Sahi, Po Bhejiputa, Ps-Bhanjanagar, Ganjam, Orissa Opp Patry-1 Respondent 1 2 The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd Represented by it Divisional Manager, At/Po/Ps -Berhampur, Ganjam Opp Party-2 Respondent 2
ToHon’ble the Chief Justice of India and His Companion Judges of the
Supreme Court of India at New Delhi
The Special Leave Petition of the Petitioner
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. The petitioner above named respectfully submits this petition seeking
special leave to appeal against the final judgment/order of Orissa
High Court Cuttack of dated 16/9/2009 in MACA No 284/2007 where
the single bench partly allowed the appeal of petitioner
2. QUESTIONS OF LAW :
I weather the High Court Rightly not decided all the questions
regarding Law and facts raised by the petitioners as grounds of
appeal
II weather the High Court rightly not awarded compensation
towards pecuniary and non pecuniary losses separately
III weather for 2 ½” shorten of Right leg amount a 60% disability
and for the said disability the award made by High Court and
Tribunal justified
VI weather a interim order is final and conclusive and weather a
court is bound to accept it at the time of passing judgment
ignoring documentary and oral (evidence of medical experts)
evidence available in record
V Weather the petitioner entitled to get medicine expenses,
attendant charges, vehicle rent as compensation
3. DECLARATION IN TERMS OF RULE 4(2):
The petitioner states that no other petition seeking leave to appeal
has been filed by him against the impugned judgment and order dated
16/9/2009
4. DECLARATION IN TERMS OF RULE 6:
The petitioner states that the annexure produced with the SLP are
true copies of the pleadings/documents which formed part of the
records of the case in the Court below against whose order the leave
to appeal is sought for in this petition.
5. GROUNDS:
Leave to appeal is sought for on the following grounds.
A. For that specifically the petitioner want draw kind attention of
the Hon’able Court on a earlier decision SHASHENDRA LAHRI
VRS UNICEF AND OTHERS (1997) II SCC 446, decided on
6/12/1996(Civil Appeal No-15567/1996) where this Hon’able
Court awarded a addition of Rs 4 Lakhs with Rs 58,000/-
award of High Court for a occurrence of 6/1/1977 with interest
of 12% per annum for disability of shorten of leg by 3” inches, to
a 17 years old B.Com Student, where as in this case the
petitioner was a advocate who had a income of Rs 7,000/- per
month from profession and agriculture and age was 29 year old
at the time of accident, and also sustained a disability of
shortened of right leg for 2 ½’inches, which amount 60%
disability, so claim of Rs 11 Lakh is not higher side due to
decrease of money value because of inflation
B. For that while decide the case neither the Tribunal nor the High
Court awarded compensation towards pecuniary and non
pecuniary loss separately, but as per the settled principle of law
laid by this Hon’able court earlier, amount of compensation
shall be calculated separately for each factor. I(1995) ACC 281
(SC) decided on 6/1/1995 vide civil Appeal Nos 1799-1800 of
1989
C. For that the High court only enhanced a Rs 25,000/- with out
any interest for injury sustained and disability suffered, which is
too low and unjustified as per law and principle laid down by
this Hon’able court time to time, the petitioner want to draw kind
attention of the Hon’able Court on the fallowing
citations[(1997)II SCC 446, AIR 1998 SC 3064, I(1995)ACC
281(SC), {1999 SAR (Civil)526 decided on 8/4/1999vide Civil