Orissa High Court
The Regional Manager (T.P. Cell) vs Ranjita Sethy And Others on 14 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.355 of 2022
The Regional Manager (T.P. Cell), .... Appellant
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
Mr. P.K. Mahali, Advocate
-versus-
Ranjita Sethy and others .... Respondents
Mr. D. Pattanaik, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 5
.
CORAM:
JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
14.12.2022
Order No.
I.A. No.735 of 2022
05. 1. Heard Mr. P.K. Mahali, learned counsel for the Appellant-
Insurance Company as well as Mr. D. Pattanaik, learned counsel
for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5-claimants.
2. Upon hearing both the parties and considering the grounds
mentioned in the petition, the delay in filing the appeal is
condoned.
3. The I.A. is disposed of.
MACA No.355 of 2022
4. Heard Mr. P.K. Mahali, learned counsel for the Appellant-
Insurance Company as well as Mr. D. Pattanaik, learned counsel
for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5-claimants.
5. Present appeal by the insurer is directed against the judgment
dated 23.12.2021 of learned 1st M.A.C.T., Kendrapara in M.A.C.
Case No.80 of 2019, wherein compensation to the tune of
Rs.10,00,000/- has been granted along with interest @7% per
annum to the claimants from the date of filing of the claim
application, i.e.24.07.2019 on account of death of the deceased in
the motor vehicular accident dated 10.11.2018.
6. Mr. P.K. Mahali, learned counsel for the insurer contends that
the driver of the offending vehicle, i.e., Truck bearing
Registration No.OD-05-AE-6025 did not have a valid driving
license on the date of accident. According to Mr. Mahali, the
driver had the license authorizing to drive a LMV only, whereas
the offending vehicle is a heavy goods carriage vehicle (unladen
weight 12,990 kg).
7. Mr. Pattanaik, learned counsel for the claimants - Respondents
No.1 to 5, is unable to dispute the contention of Mr. Mahali
regarding LMV license of the driver on the date of accident. As
such, clear violation of policy conditions being noticed, the
insurer is entitled for right of recovery.
8. On the question of quantum of compensation, upon hearing
both parties and considering the grounds of challenge advanced, a
reduced compensation of Rs.8,70,000/- along with 6% interest is
proposed to the parties in course of hearing. Mr. D. Pattanaik,
learned counsel for the claimants agrees to the same and Mr. P.K.
Mahali, learned counsel for the Appellant-Insurance Company
leaves it to the discretion of the Court. The compensation amount
is accordingly fixed to that extent.
9. In the result, the Appellant - Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the reduced compensation of Rs.8,70,000/- (rupees eight
lakhs seventy thousand) before the Tribunal along with interest
@6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application,
i.e. 24.07.2019 within a period of two months from today; where-
after the same shall be disbursed in favour of the claimants on
such terms and proportion to be decided by the Tribunal. As
stated earlier, the insurer-Appellant is granted with right to
recover the amount of compensation from the owner in
accordance with law.
10. On deposit of the award amount before the learned Tribunal
and filing of a receipt evidencing the deposit with a refund
application before this Court, the statutory deposit made before
this Court with accrued interest thereon shall be refunded to the
Appellant-Insurance Company.
11. The MACA is disposed of with aforesaid directions.
12. An urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
B.K. Barik
