ORISSA HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. V/S SANJAY KUMAR PRADHAN AND ANR

CUTTACK, India, May 26 -- Orissa High Court issued the following order on April 24:

1. The appellant, who is the Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd, Bhubaneswar has challenged the impugned judgment dated 18.08.2025 passed in M.A.C. Case No.102/646 of 2024/2002, by which the learned 5th Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Puri (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Tribunal") has directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.1,01,000/- (Rupees One Lakh One Thousand) together with the interest @ 6% per annum w.e.f. date of filing of the claim application i.e. 23.12.2002 till its realization to the claimant-injured-Sanjay Kumar Pradhan, who has been impleaded as Respondent No.1 (R-1) towards the injury sustained by him in a motor vehicular accident in an application U/S. 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short, "the Act").

2. Briefly put, on 22.11.2002 at about 4.30P.M., the claimant while coming on Puri-Bhubaneswar Road on a Luna Moped bearing Regd. No. OR-02T-8134 met with an accident near Pipili Telephone Exchange while an Ambassador Car bearing Regd. No. ORF-1675 (hereinafter referred to as "the offending vehicle") dashed him and according to the claimant, the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending car. Further, the accident was reported to Police and accordingly, Pipili P.S. Case No. 244 of 2002 was registered, which subsequently matured into charge sheet in G.R. Case No. 421 of 2002 of the Court of learned JMFC, Pipili. On the aforesaid fact, the claimant preferred an application U/S. 166 of the Act for compensation towards injury sustained by him in the accident by impleading the owner and insurer of the offending car.

3. In response to the claim, the owner of the offending car after being substituted remains ex-parte, but the insurance company contested the claim by filing the written statement denying the claim of the claimant and pleading inter alia to disown its liability on the ground of offending vehicle plying on the road without valid motor vehicular documents.

4. On inter se pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed as many as five issues and allowed the parties to lead evidence. The claimant in support of his claim, examined 03 witnesses including himself as PWs.1 to 3 and exhibited six documents under Exts 1 to 6 as against no oral evidence, but one document under Ext.A by the insurance company. On analysis of the evidence on record and after hearing the parties, the learned Tribunal passed the impugned judgment directing the insurance company to pay the compensation amount indicated supra. Being aggrieved, the insurance company has preferred this appeal.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816xzpn0M%2BgEY496EK5FvkJsEc7nUt3TIGHVl4YEpJxKAsl&caseno=MACA/1340/2025&cCode=1&cino=ODHC010918252025&state_code=11&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.