Orissa High Court
The Manager (Legal Claims) vs Krushna Chandra Dehury Since Dead on 23 March, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.556 of 2018 & MACA No.410 of 2018
MACA No.556 of 2018
The Manager (Legal Claims),
Shriram General Insurance Co.Ltd. .... Appellant
Mr.A.A.Khan, Advocate
-versus-
Krushna Chandra Dehury since dead .... Respondents
through LRs and others
Mr.B.N.Rath, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1(a),(b), 2 & 3
AND
MACA No.410 of 2018
Narottam Dehury and others .... Appellants
Mr.B.N.Rath, Advocate
-versus-
Deepak Mahapatra and another .... Respondents
Mr.A.A.Khan, Advocate for Respondent No.2
CORAM:
JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
23.3.2023
Order No.
07. 1. The matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.
2. Heard Mr.Khan learned counsel for the Insurer and
Mr.Rath, learned counsel for the Claimants.
3. Both the appeals arise out of same judgment dated 21st
December, 2017 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-
cum-4th M.A.C.T., Keonjhar, in M.A.C. Case No.51/29 of 2016-
14, wherein compensation to tune of Rs.5,20,040/- along with
interest @6% per annum has been granted from the date of filing
of the claim application on account of death of the deceased in the
motor vehicular accident dated 13th November, 2013.
4. MACA No.556 of 2018 has been filed by the Insurance
Company challenging the award, whereas MACA No.410 of
2018 has been filed by the claimants praying for enhancement of
the compensation amount.
5. Mr.Khan while advancing his submission disputes
involvement of the offending vehicle i.e. Tipper bearing
registration no.OR-09-D-5681 in the accident. In this regard, it is
submitted that the vehicle details was not mentioned in the F.I.R.
and has subsequently been implanted to manage the
compensation amount. This submission of Mr.Khan is rejected
outright keeping in view the fact that the police upon completion
of investigation have submitted the charge-sheet against the
accused driver of the offending vehicle stating its involvement
and secondly, no evidence has been adduced from the side of
Insurance Company in support of such contention.
6. As regards to quantification of the compensation
amount, it is seen that admittedly no future prospects has been
added to the income of the deceased. It is further seen that an
amount of Rs.1,10,000/- has been granted towards general
damages including loss of consortium. Such computation made
by the Tribunal being found erroneous against the approved
principles, the computation is made afresh by this court.
7. Confirming the income of the deceased at Rs.4,020/- as
calculated by the Tribunal and adding future prospects to the
extent of 40% thereon, the loss of dependency is determined at
Rs.5,74,056/-. Adding Rs.40,000/- towards filial consortium to
the mother of deceased and Rs.30,000/- towards loss of estate and
funeral expenses, total compensation is determined at
Rs.6,44,056/- (Six lakhs forty four thousand fifty six), payable
along with interest @6% per annum.
8. In the result, both the appeals are disposed with a
direction to the Insurer to deposit a sum of Rs.6,44,056/- (Six
lakhs forty four thousand fifty six) along with interest @6% per
annum before the Tribunal from the date of filing of the claim
application 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. The statutory deposit made by the Appellant in MACA
No.556 of 2018 along with accrued interest thereon be refunded
to him on proper application and on production of proof of
deposit of the award amount before the learned Tribunal.
10. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
C.R.Biswal
