Orissa High Court
Niranjan Das And Others vs Subhashree Samal And Another on 5 April, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.788 of 2020
Niranjan Das and others .... Appellants
Mr. P.K. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
Subhashree Samal and another .... Respondents
Mr. S.K. Ghose, Advocate for Respondent No.2
Mr. D. Nayak, Advocate on behalf of Mr. S. Sahoo, Advocate
for Respondent No.1
.
CORAM:
JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
05.04.2023
Order No.
05. 1. Heard Mr. P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the Appellants-
claimants, Mr. S.K. Ghose, learned counsel for Respondent No2-
insurance company and Mr. D. Nayak on behalf of Mr. S. Sahoo,
learned counsel for Respondent No.1-owner.
2. Present appeal by the claimants is directed against the
judgment dated 23.09.2020 of learned 3rd M.A.C.T., Jajpur in
M.A.C. Case No.13 of 2017, wherein compensation to the tune of
Rs.7,50,000/- has been granted along with interest @6% per
annum to the claimants from the date of filing of the claim
application, i.e. 31.01.2017 on account of death of the deceased in
the motor vehicular accident dated 4.1.2016.
3. The learned Tribunal while awarding compensation has
directed the owner to pay the same by exonerating the insurer.
This is questioned by the Appellants.
4. Pursuant to the notice, Respondent No.1-owner appeared and
filed affidavit dated 7.2.2023 appending copy of the insurance
policy and all other relevant documents in respect of the
offending vehicle. Accordingly, upon verification, Mr. Ghose,
learned counsel for the Respondent No.2-insurer though does not
dispute validity of the insurance policy, but contends that the
accused-driver did not have a valid transport DL on the date of
accident. But on verification, it is seen that the accused-driver
was having a valid license in respect of LMV on the date of
accident and this is not disputed by Mr. Ghose. The offending
vehicle is a Mini Truck having unladen weight of 4450 kg. as per
registration certificate. Therefore, absence of DL in respect of
transport vehicle on the part of the driver would neither be a
hindrance nor would be a violation of policy conditions. Thus, it
is held that the insurance company, i.e. New India Assurance Co.
Ltd. (Respondent No.2) is liable to indemnify the owner in
respect of the compensation amount.
4. With regard to quantum of compensation, it is contended by
the claimants that the income of the deceased should not be less
than Rs.6000/- at any circumstance keeping in view the rate of
minimum wages prevalent on the date of accident. As a matter of
fact, the prevalent rate of minimum wages for unskilled labourer
prevalent on 4.1.2016 was Rs.200/- per day. Thus accepting the
income of the deceased at Rs.6000/- per month at least, the
annual loss of dependency is computed at Rs.50,400/- with
addition of future prospects to the extent of 40% and deducting
50% towards personal expenses. The total loss of dependency
becomes Rs.9,07,200/-. Adding Rs.1,10,000/- towards general
damages including filial consortium to both parents, the final
compensation amount is determined at Rs.10,17,200/-, payable
along with interest @6% per annum.
5. In the result, the appeal is disposed of with a direction to
Respondent No.2-New India Assurance Co. Ltd. to deposit the
modified compensation amount of Rs.10,17,200/- (rupees ten
lakhs seventeen thousand two hundred) before the Tribunal along
with interest @6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim
application, i.e. 31.01.2017 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 learned
Tribunal.
6. An urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
B.K. Barik
