Ganeswar Muduli vs Bibhuti Bhusan Sahoo And Another

B. P. Routray, J

Heard Mr. J.D. Barik, learned counsel for the claimant - Appellant, Mr. B.N. Satpathy, learned counsel for the owner and Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel for the insurer.

The present appeal is by the injured - claimant whose claim application was rejected by the learned 1st MACT, Cuttack in MAC No.600 of 2012. It is submitted by the Appellant that the learned Tribunal has committed gross error in disbelieving the involvement of the offending motor cycle bearing registration No.OR 05 AN 4209 in the accident.

Mr. Satpathy, learned counsel for the owner - Respondent No.1 supports the claim of the Appellant by submitting that he is the owner of the offending vehicle which in fact was involved in the accident.

Mr. Dutta, learned counsel for the insurer - Respondent No.2 submits on his part that since the F.I.R. was lodged after 21 days of occurrence and the registration number of the vehicle has been mentioned as OR 05 AN 9209 instead of OR 05 AN 4209, no fault can be found in the finding of the learned tribunal exonerating the offending vehicle from the accident.

Having heard all the parties, it is found that admittedly in the F.I.R. the name of the owner has been mentioned as Bibhuti Bhusan Sahoo who is the owner of motor cycle bearing registration No.OR 05 AN 4209. It is further seen from the registration certificate produced in respect of the motor cycle OR 05 AN 4209, the owner's address is in the district of Jagatsinghpur whereas the owner's address in respect of motor cycle OR 05 AN 9204 is in the district of Jajpur. The place of accident is under Balikuda P.S. in the district of Jagatsinghpur. Therefore, no further ambiguity remains there regarding involvement of the offending motor cycle bearing registration No. OR 05 AN 4209 in the accident, particularly when the charge-sheet has been submitted against Bibhuti Bhusan Sahoo in the police case. But the learned tribunal without discussing all such factors has exonerated the offending vehicle by disbelieving the case of the Appellant.

Thus, the impugned judgement is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned 1st MACT, Cuttack with a direction to decide the claim of the Appellant on merit and to pass the judgment within a period of four months from today. All the parties present before this Court are directed to appear before the Court of learned 1st MACT, Cuttack in MAC No.600 of 2012 on 15th December 2021. Further, as prayed by Respondent No.1 - owner, he is permitted to file his WS within a period of seven days from the date of appearance.

The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.

.............................