Orissa High Court
The Oriental Insurance Company ... vs Prafulla Mahapatra And Others on 26 July, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.242 of 2021
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.
represented by its Divisional Manager .... Appellant
Mr. G.P. Dutta, Advocate
-versus-
Prafulla mahapatra and Others .... Respondents
Mr. P.K. Mishra, Advocate for Respondents 2-4
CORAM:
SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
26.7.2022
Order No.
05. 1. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. The name of Respondent No.1 be deleted in view of the memo
filed and as prayed by Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel for the
Appellant.
3. Heard Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel for the insurer -
Appellant and Mr. P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for claimant -
Respondents.
4. Present appeal by the insurer is directed against the impugned
judgment dated 2nd April, 2021 of learned 5th MACT, Puri passed in
MAC No.106/318 of 2015/2012 wherein compensation to the tune of
Rs.6,37,000/- along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of
filing of the claim application, i.e. 10th August, 2012 has been granted
on account of death of the deceased in the motor vehicular accident
dated 28th June, 2012.
5. It is submitted by Mr. Dutta, learned counsel on behalf of the
insurer that the present offending vehicle is a vehicle which is
involved in several accidents. It is further submitted that the age of the
deceased has been wrongly calculated to apply multiplier '14' instead
of '11' since as per the voter identity card the deceased was 53 years
on the date of accident. It is further submitted that the alleged
dependents being the major children of the deceased, the amount
deducted towards personal expenses should be counted to the extent
of 1/3rd instead of 1/4th.
6. On the other hand, it is submitted by Mr. Mishra, learned
counsel for the claimants that as per the post mortem examination
report the age of the deceased was 43 years and the alleged dispute
regarding age of the deceased as submitted by the Appellant was not
pleaded before the learned tribunal and the alleged copy of the voter
identity card filed on behalf of the insurer has no authenticity and the
same has not been proved on record.
7. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel further submits that the learned
Tribunal has not added any future prospects and also not granted any
amount towards consortium to the claimants.
8. Upon hearing both parties, the ground as raised on behalf of the
Appellant with regard to age of the deceased is rejected in absence of
any proof to that effect and further, the contention that the offending
vehicle is involved in several accidents is also rejected being without
merit in absence of any evidence to that effect.
9. The submissions as made by the counsel for the claimants
regarding enhancement of the compensation amount are not
entertained in absence of any challenge to that effect. However, in the
circumstances the award amount is confirmed but the rate of interest
is reduced to 6%.
10. At this stage it is submitted by Mr. Dutta that in terms of
direction of this court dated 24th August, 2021, 50% of the total award
amount has been deposited before the tribunal and the same has been
disbursed.
11. Considering such submissions, the appeal is disposed of with a
direction to the appellant to deposit before the tribunal the remaining
award amount along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of
filing of the claim application, i.e. 10th August, 2012, within two
months from today, where-after the same shall be disbursed in favour
of the claimants on such terms and proportion as contained in the
impugned judgment.
12. 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 before the
tribunal.
13. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
M.K.Panda
