Orissa High Court
M/S.Reliance General Insurance vs Pramila Rout And Others on 23 March, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.502 of 2016 & MACA No.564 of 2016
In MACA No.502 of 2016
M/s.Reliance General Insurance .... Appellant
Company Ltd.
Mr. S. Satapathy, Advocate
-versus-
Pramila Rout and others .... Respondents
Mr. P.K. Mishra, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 4
In MACA No.564 of 2016
Pramila Rout and others .... Appellants
Mr. P.K.Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
Lala Rajendra Prasad Ray and another .... Respondents
Mr. S. Satapathy, Advocate for Respondent No.2
CORAM:
JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
23.03.2023
Order No.
MACA No.502 of 2016 and MACA No.564 of 2016
11. 1. Heard S. Satapathy, learned counsel for the Insurance
Company and Mr. P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the claimants.
2. Both the appeals being arise out of the common judgment
dated 29.2.2016 of learned 5th MACT, Khurda in M.A.C.T. Case
No.149 of 2011, wherein compensation to the tune of
Rs.32,72,170/- has been granted along with interest @6% per
annum to the claimants from the date of filing of the claim
application, i.e.11.11.2011 on account of death of the deceased in
a motor vehicular accident dated 11.9.2011, are heard together
and disposed of by this common order.
3. MACA No.502 of 2016 has been filed by the insurer
challenging the award. Mr. Satapathy contends on behalf of the
insurer that the charge-sheet in the Police case being filed after
filing of the claim application, no reliance can be placed on the
charge-sheet in support of the contention of the claimants and
secondly, when the FIR does not disclose the registration number
of the offending vehicle, it is suspicious on the part of the
claimants to mention the registration number of the offending
vehicle in the claim application before filing of the charge-sheet.
4. MACA No.564 of 2016 has been filed by the claimants
praying for enhancement of the compensation amount on the
ground of addition of future prospects to the income and grant of
amount towards consortium.
5. The claim application was filed on 11.11.2011 and the
accident took place on 11.9.2011. The FIR was lodged on
23.9.2011 and the deceased died on 28.10.2011 while undergoing
treatment in the Hospital. The Police submitted the charge-sheet
on 31.3.2013.
6. It is seen from the Police papers that the Police started
investigation immediately after lodging of the FIR and in course
of investigation, the statement of one Binod Pattanaik was
recorded on 28.10.2011 under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C., who
stated the details of offending vehicle as pick-up van bearing
Registration No.OR-02-AE-9487. Therefore, the argument
advanced on behalf of the insurer is found completely baseless
that the claimants have connived to implant the offending vehicle
in the accident. When the details of the offending vehicle has
been stated by the witness on 28.10.2011 in course of Police
investigation, it is natural on the part of the claimants to know
about the same for filing the claim application. As such, all such
contentions raised by Mr. Satapathy in this regard are rejected.
Moreover, the Insurance Company did not adduce any evidence
before the learned Tribunal.
7. With regard to quantum of compensation, it is seen from the
impugned award that admittedly no future prospects have been
added to the income of the deceased and despite the claimants
being the wife and children of the deceased they were not granted
any amount towards consortium. Considering these aspects, the
compensation amount is modified to Rs.38,64,230/-, payable
along with interest @6% per annum.
8. In the result, both the appeals are disposed of with a direction
to M/s. Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. to deposit the
modified compensation of Rs.38,64,230/- (rupees thirty-eight
lakhs sixty-four thousand two hundred thirty) before the Tribunal
along with interest @6% per annum from the date of filing of the
claim application, i.e. 11.11.2011 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 fixed by the
Tribunal.
9. On deposit of the award amount before learned Tribunal and
filing of a receipt evidencing the deposit with a refund application
before this Court, the statutory deposit made in MACA No.502 of
2016 before this Court with accrued interest thereon shall be
refunded to the Insurance Company.
10. The copies of the Police papers as exhibited before the
learned Tribunal and produced in course of hearing before this
Court by Mr. S. Satapathy, learned counsel for the insurer are
kept on record.
11. An urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
B.K. Barik
