Orissa High Court
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd vs Sasmita Das And Others on 4 December, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.256 of 2021
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. .... Appellant
Mr. Subrat Satpathy, Advocate
-versus-
Sasmita Das and Others .... Respondents
Mr. Pradeep Kumar Mishra, counsel for Respondent Nos.1-4
CORAM:
SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
04.12.2021
Order No.
04. 1. Heard Mr. Satpathy, learned counsel for the Appellant and Mr.
Mishra, learned counsel for the claimant - Respondent Nos.1-4.
2. The present appeal by the insurer has been directed against the
judgment dated 12th February, 2021 of the learned 1st MACT, Cuttack
in MAC Case No.356 of 2016.
3. Mr. Satpathy, learned counsel for the Appellant contends that
the judgment of the learned Tribunal suffers with many impunities.
Firstly, it is pointed out that the F.I.R. was lodged after 48 days of the
accident so there is genuine doubt arose regarding the accident and
involvement of the vehicles in question. Secondly, the age of the
deceased as per the voter identity card adduced by P.W.1 (the widow)
is 31 years as on 1st January, 2002 and therefore on the date of
accident the age of the deceased would be 45 years. So the application
of the multiplier as 16 should be modified to 14 and accordingly the
loss of dependency as well as loss of future prospectus of income
should be modified consequently.
4. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the claimants contends that
even if the age of the deceased is considered to be within the age
group of 41 to 45 years, taking into account the rate of minimum
wages prescribed during the year 2015 which is Rs.200/- per day, the
monthly income of the deceased should be counted at Rs.6,000/- per
month instead of Rs.5,500/- as determined by the learned Tribunal. It
is further clarified that since the total compensation was adequately
granted by the learned Tribunal the claimant - Respondents did not
prefer any challenge to the same. So, it is contended by Mr. Mishra
that taking into consideration the pros and cons in the impugned
judgment the final compensation amount as granted by the learned
Tribunal should not be disturbed which seems to be just
compensation.
5. After hearing both parties and upon perusal of the impugned
judgment it is found that the death of the deceased in the accident in
question is not disputed by the insurer so his claim about any delay in
lodging the F.I.R. would not stand sufficient to discard the claim of
the claimants that the deceased did not die arising out of the accident
involving the vehicles in question. Moreover, from the police papers it
is clear that the driver of the vehicle in question has been charge-
sheeted in the criminal case which is not disputed by the insurer.
6. Coming to examine the contentions of both parties with regard
to computation of just compensation, it is found that there is force in
the contentions of both the parties. Even if the age of the deceased is
considered between the age group of 41 to 45 years based on the voter
identity card submitted by P.W.1 in course of her evidence, at the
same time it is found that the learned Tribunal has committed error in
determining the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.5,500/- instead
of Rs.6000/- because the avocation of the deceased is stated to be an
welder as not disputed on record, considering the rate of minimum
wages prevailing in the year 2015, the monthly income of the
deceased is fixed at Rs.6000/-. After doing necessary calculation and
adding the ancillary amounts in terms of judgment in the case of
National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Others
(2017) 16 SCC 680 and by adding parental consortium, in my opinion
the total compensation amount is reduced to Rs.11,00,000/-
7. Accordingly the Appellant - insurer is directed to deposit the
modified compensation amount of Rs.11,00,000/- (eleven lakhs) along
with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim
application, i.e. 20th May, 2016 before the learned Tribunal within a
period of 8 weeks from today. However, the direction towards penal
interest @ 12% per annum is waived. The amount shall be disbursed
amongst the claimants in the same proportion in terms of direction of
learned Tribunal.
8. The statutory deposit made by the appellant before this court
along with accrued interest be refunded to the Appellant - insurer on
proper application and on production of proof of deposit of the
awarded amount with interest before the tribunal.
9. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
9. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
M.K.Panda
