MACA/30/2024 of SUJETA KUMAR PARIDA @ SUJIT PARIDA Vs CAPT. ASWINI KUMAR BARAL on 13 August 2026

ORDER

13.08.2026 Order No.

05.

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). I.A. No.136 of 2024

2. This is an application with a prayer for condonation of delay filed at the instance of the Appellant-Claimant.

3. Heard learned counsel for the Appellant-Claimant as well as learned counsel appearing for the Respondents-Insurance Company.

4. On perusal on record it appears that notice on Respondent No.1 and 3 has been made sufficient. So far as Respondent No.2 is concerned, it appears that notice on appeal memo has not been made sufficient against such Respondent. However, the impugned judgment reveals that the Respondent No.2 was set ex-parte before the Tribunal. Therefore, notice to such Respondent is dispensed with for the time being.

5. Learned counsel for the Appellant-Claimant at the outset contended that the present application has been filed with a prayer for condonation of delay of 1405 days. While explaining the delay, learned counsel for the Appellant contended that the Appellant-Claimant is a poor person, who had no idea about the filing of the claim case and the process that is required to be followed. He further submitted that the Claimant-Appellant is entirely depended on the counsel who had filed a claim case.

6. Learned counsel for the Appellant-Claimant further contended that after filing of the claim application, the Appellant could not contact his conducting counsel due to his illness. Further, referring to the impugned judgment, learned counsel for the Appellant contended that the Claimant-Petitioner before the Tribunal could not file any document in the claim case. He further contended that the claimant himself is the victim, who has sustained injuries in a motor accident. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Appellant-Claimant contended that the delay in presenting the appeal may be condoned in the larger interest of justice.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondent-Insurance Company on the other hand objected to the condonation of delay on the ground that the delay has not been properly explained. He further contended that opportunity was granted by the learned Tribunal to the claimant to produce evidence. However, no steps were taken, as a result of which, the learned Tribunal after waiting a long time has finally disposed of the claim application by observing in Para-6 of the judgment that not a single document has been filed in support of the claim petition by the Claimant. Accordingly a nil award has been passed.

8. Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for both sides, on a careful examination of the grounds taken, this Court is inclined to condone the delay in the larger interest of justice. Accordingly, the delay is condoned.

9. The I.A. stands disposed of. MACA No.30 of 2024

10. Heard learned counsel for the Appellant as well as learned counsel for the Respondent-Insurance Company. Perused the impugned judgment dated 20.12.2019 in M.A.C. No.115 of 2024 by the learned Additional District Judge-cum-3rd M.A.C.T., Dhenkanal.

11. By filing the present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the Claimant-Appellant has approached this Court thereby challenging the nil award dated 20.12.2019 passed by the 3rd MACT, Dhenkanal. Having heard learned counsel appearing for both sides, on a careful examination of the impugned judgment dated 20.12.2019, this Court observes that the learned Tribunal in Para-6 of the judgment has indicated that no documents were filed on behalf of the Claimant-Appellant before the learned Tribunal. As a result of which, the claim application was disposed of by passing a nil award dated 20.12.2019.

12. Learned counsel for the Appellant at the outset contended that the Claimant-Appellant himself is the victim as a result of which he could not assist his conducting counsel properly in collecting the documents. Therefore, there was some delay in collecting the papers. He further submitted that the Claimant- Appellant due to his ill-health and change of exigence is not remained in touch with the conducting counsel. Therefore, the Claimant-Appellant was in the dark with regard to the progress in the claims case. He further submitted that taking into consideration the poor financial condition of the Claimant- Appellant he should have been provided another opportunity to furnish the documents for consideration by the learned Tribunal.

13. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondent-Insurance Company on the other hand objected to the prayer made by the Appellant. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal has not committed any illegality in passing nil award and on such ground, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company contended that the present appeal is devoid of merit and, accordingly, the same should be dismissed at the threshold.

14. Having regard to the learned counsels appearing for both sides and on a careful examination of the background facts as well as the subsequent developments that have taken place, further on a careful scrutiny of the impugned judgment dated 20.12.2019 at

Annexure-1, this Court is of the view that it would cause injustice to the Appellant-Claimants if an opportunity is not given to him to present his case before the Tribunal.

15. Taking into consideration the fact that the law relating to grant of compensation of motor accident claims cases being a beneficial legislation for the betterment of the claim-victim, this Court is inclined to take a lenient view in the matter and to provide another opportunity to the Claimant-Appellant to contest the case by adducing the evidence. Accordingly, the judgment dated 20.12.2019 at Annexure-1 is hereby set aside. Further, the matter is remanded back to the learned 3rd M.A.C.T., Dhenkanal to be reconsidered the claim application of the Claimant by providing opportunity to the Claimant. It is further directed that the Claimant-Appellant shall cooperate with the learned Tribunal for an early disposal of a claim case. Learned counsel appearing for the Claimant as well as the Respondent-Insurance Company assured this Court that they shall not take any unnecessary adjournments and shall cooperate with the learned Tribunal for early disposal of the claim case, preferably within a period of four months from the date of communication of a copy of today’s order. The learned Tribunal shall also consider the claims case afresh by providing opportunity to the Parties. It is open to the learned counsel for the Respondent-Insurance Company to take the ground that the claimants shall not be entitled to the interest in the event it is established that the delay in disposal of the application is solely attributable to the Claimant and, in such eventuality, learned Tribunal shall consider the same and, shall pass the necessary order thereon.

16. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of.

( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra)

Judge Sisir

Digitally Signed Signed by: SISIR KUMAR SETHI Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 14-Aug-2026 18:59:33 Signature Not Verified