Orissa High Court
Priyadarsini Patra And Others vs Nagendra Nayak And Another on 6 May, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.277 of 2019
Priyadarsini Patra and Others .... Appellants
Mr. P.K. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
Nagendra Nayak and Another .... Respondents
Mr. G.P. Dutta, counsel for Respondent No.2
CORAM:
SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
6.5.2022
Order No.
07. 1. Heard Mr. P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the claimant -
Appellants and Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel for insurer -
Respondent No.2.
2. Present appeal by the claimants has been filed challenging the
common judgment dated 31st January, 2019 of learned 1st MACT,
Dhenkanal passed in MAC Nos.88 & 89 of 2012. The present appeal
is in respect of MAC No.89 of 2012 wherein compensation to the tune
of Rs.12,59,000/- along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date
of filing of the claim application, i.e. 27th March, 2012 has been
granted on account of death of the deceased in the motor vehicular
accident dated 8th February, 2012. Further, the insurer has been
granted right of recovery of said amount from the owner of the
vehicle.
3. It is submitted on behalf of the Appellants that no future
prospect has been paid by the Tribunal though the deceased was aged
about 33 years on the date of accident, and the only child of the
deceased, namely Priti Prangya Patra (present Appellant No.2) has not
been granted the filial consortium.
4. Upon hearing Mr. Dutta, learned counsel for the insurer and
perusal of the impugned judgment, it reveals that the tribunal has
assessed loss of dependency of Rs.8,64,000/- based on the income of
the deceased at Rs.6000/- per month without adding any future
prospects.
5. Admittedly the Appellants do not question such assessment of
monthly income of the deceased done by the Tribunal at Rs.6000/-.
As such accepting the same being the undisputed amount towards
income, future prospect to the extent of 40% requires to be added to
the same in terms of principles decided in the case of National
Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680,
for the purpose of calculating loss of dependency. By adding so, the
same comes to Rs.12,09,600/-.
6. Again, the claimant Appellant No.2 is found entitled to further
sum of Rs.40,000/- towards filial consortium as per the principles
decided in the case of Magma General Insurance Company Ltd. v.
Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and Others, (2018) 18 SCC 130.
7. Thus, on computation, the total differential amount above the
award is found to be Rs.3,85,600 and considering the probable interest
payable @ 6% per annum on it from the date of filing of the claim
application, the insurer is found liable to pay a further consolidated
sum of Rs.5,50,000/-.
8. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the Insurer, i.e. M/s.
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. (Respondent No.2) is directed to
deposit a further consolidated sum of Rs.5,50,000/- (five lakh fifty
thousand) before the tribunal within a period of two months from
today; where-after the same shall be disbursed in favour of the
claimant - Appellants on such terms and proportion to be decided by
the learned Tribunal.
9. The right of recovery as granted by the learned Tribunal is left
undisturbed.
10. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
M.K.Panda
