Orissa High Court
The Divisional Manager vs Laxmipriya Parida @ Sarojini ... on 5 July, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.296 of 2020
The Divisional Manager, New India
Assurance Co. Ltd., Badambadi,
Cuttack .... Appellant
Mr. N.S. Ghose, Advocate
-versus-
Laxmipriya Parida @ Sarojini Parida .... Respondents
and Others
Mr. P.K. Mishra, counsel for Respondents 1 to 5
CORAM:
SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
5.7.2023
Order No.
09. 1. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard Mr. N.S. Ghose, learned counsel for the insurer -
Appellant and Mr. P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the claimant -
Respondents.
3. Present appeal by the insurer - Appellant is directed against the
impugned judgment dated 29th October, 2019 of learned 3rd MACT,
Jagatsinghpur passed in MAC No.23 of 2006, wherein compensation
to the tune of Rs.5,90,000/- along with interest @ 7% per annum from
the date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 3rd March, 2006 has
been granted on account of death of deceased Mama @ Sasmita
Parida in the motor vehicular accident dated 30th January, 2006.
4. Mr. Ghose submits that the name of the deceased was Mama @
Rasmita Parida and not Sasmita Parida as stated by the claimants. It is
accordingly submitted that since the name of the deceased has not
been mentioned correctly, the impugned award is unsustainable and
the claimants are not entitled for any compensation as Sasmita did not
die in the accident.
5. Admittedly Rasmita Parida and Sasmita Parida are two sisters
being the daughters of Mahendra Parida and Laxmipriya Parida. In the
motor vehicular accident dated 30th January 2006 involving the
offending vehicle, i.e. Bus bearing registration number OR-05-G-
1789, Mama @ Rasmita Parida died. These facts are admitted by both
the counsels and no dispute is there about death of Mama @ Rasmita
Parida in the accident.
6. Mr. Mishra submits that the name of the deceased has been
inadvertently mentioned in the F.I.R and other police papers as Mama
@ Sasmita instead of Mama @ Rasmita. It is further submitted that
the parents being illiterate persons belonging to poor stratum of
society could not rectify the mistake due to ignorance. Accordingly
the name of the deceased remained uncorrected as such.
7. Upon hearing both parties and considering the peculiar facts,
particularly the admitted fact that the name of the deceased is Mama
@ Rasmita who is the daughter of same parents, I do not feel any
reason to set aside the impugned award on that ground only. It needs
to be stated here that no other ground has been pressed by the
Appellant to challenge the award. Keeping in view the beneficial
intention of the statute, the name of the deceased is corrected as
Mama @ Rasmita Parida instead of Mama @ Sasmita Parida.
Accordingly, the name of claimant - Respondent No.3 is corrected as
Sasmita Parida.
8. The impugned award of the tribunal is confirmed accordingly.
However, the rate of interest is reduced to 6% from 7%.
9. In the result the appeal is disposed of with a direction to the
insurer - Appellant to deposit the entire compensation amount of
Rs.5,90,000/- (five lakhs ninety thousand) before the tribunal along
with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim
application, i.e. 3rd March 2006, within a period of two months from
today; where-after the same shall be disbursed in favour of the
claimant - Respondents on same terms and proportion as contained in
the impugned judgment.
10. The statutory deposit made by the appellant before this court
along with accrued interest thereof be refunded to the Appellant on
proper application and on production of proof of deposit of the
awarded amount before the tribunal
11. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
M.K.Panda
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANAS KUMAR PANDA
Designation: Senior Steno
Reason: Authentication
Location: OHC, Cuttack
Date: 07-Jul-2023 10:41:23
