Orissa High Court
M/S. Oriental Insurance vs Pravashini Behera And on 4 April, 2025
Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.831 of 2024
M/s. Oriental Insurance .... Appellant
Company Ltd., Cuttack Mr. P.K. Tripathy, Advocate
-versus-
Pravashini Behera and .... Respondents
Others Mr. B.K. Mohanty , Adv.
(Respondent Nos.1 to 3)
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
04.04.2025
I.A. NO.1671 of 2024
Order No.
2. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/Physical) Mode.
2.Heard.
3.Considering the grounds taken, the delay in filing the
appeal is condoned subject to payment of cost of
Rs.1,000/- to be deposited before the Orissa High Court
Bar Association Welfare Fund by 09.04.2025.
4. The I.A stands disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
Order No.3
1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2. This appeal has been filed by the Appellant-Company
challenging the judgment dt.30.11.2023 so passed by the
learned 1st Addl. District Judge-cum-1st MACT, Cuttack in
MAC Case No.1262 of 2019. Vide the said Judgment, the
Tribunal awarded compensation at Rs.14,50,000/- along
with interest @6% per annum payable from the date of
filing of the claim application till its realization. The
Tribunal also awarded default interest @ 12% per annum, if
the compensation so assessed is not deposited within a
period of two (2) months.
3. In support of the appeal, learned counsel appearing for
the appellant contended that in absence of any proof
/evidence of the income of the deceased as a skilled
workman and so also the fixed income of the deceased,
learned Tribunal illegally assessed the compensation by
taking Rs.10,000/- notionally per month as the income of
the deceased.
3.1. It is also contended that Tribunal awarded
compensation of Rs.1,20,000/- towards spousal and parental
consortium in place of Rs.70,000/-, which is contrary to the
decision of the Apex Court. It is further contended that award
of default interest @ 12% per annum is not sustainable in the
eye of law as being in the higher side. It is accordingly
contended that the impugned award should have been
assessed at a lower side and needs interference of this Court.
4. Even though learned counsel for the claimants-
respondents supported the impugned award, but in course of
hearing contended that the claimants-respondents will be
fully satisfied if this Court will reduce the compensation
amount to Rs.13,00,000/- along with interest @ 6% per
annum payable from the date of filing of the claim application
till its realization. With regard to award of default interest
@12% per annum, it is contended that this Court may pass
appropriate order.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-company
left the aforesaid proposition made by the learned counsel for
the Claimants-respondents to the discretion of this Court.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the submission made, this Court while
interfering with the impugned judgment is inclined to waive
out the default interest levied @ 12% per annum and
reduce the compensation to Rs.13,00,000/-along with
interest @6% per annum payable from the date of
application till its realization. This Court accordingly directs
the Appellant-Company to deposit compensation amount of
Rs.13,00,000/- along with interest @6% per annum
payable from the date of application till its realisation
within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of
this order.
6.1. It is observed that on such deposit of the amount,
the Tribunal shall do well to disburse the same in favour of
the Claimants-Respondents proportionately in terms of the
judgment dt.30.11.2023
6.2. It is further observed that if the Appellant-Company
will fail to deposit the compensation amount within the
time stipulated here-in-above, the compensation amount of
Rs.13,00,000/- shall carry interest @7% per annum
payable from the date of expiry of the period of 8 (eight)
weeks till it is so deposited.
6.3. It is observed that Account Payee Cheque so
deposited by the appellant-company and not yet invested be
returned back after satisfaction of the award.
6.4. The MACA accordingly stands disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
Subrat
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
