Orissa High Court
Manager-In-Charge vs Niladri Podh on 7 April, 2025
Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.949 of 2024
Manager-in-charge, T.P. .... Appellant
Hub, Oriental Insurance Co. Mr. G.P.Dutta, Advocate
Ltd., Sambalpur
-versus-
Niladri Podh .... Respondents
Mr. P.K. Behera , Adv.
(Respondent Nos.1 & 2)
Mr. A.K. Mishra, Adv.
(for Res. No.3)
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
7.04.2025
I.A. No.2119 of 2024
Order No.
5. 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.2,000/-
to be deposited before the Orissa High Court Welfare Fund
by 11th April, 2024.
4. The I.A stands disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
Order No.6
1.Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2. This appeal has been filed by the Appellant-Company
challenging the judgment dt.23.11.2023 so passed by the
learned 1st MACT, Kalahandi, Bhawanipatna in MAC Case
No.41 of 2021. Vide the said Judgment, the Tribunal
awarded compensation at Rs.13,11,200/- along with
interest @6% per annum payable from the date of filing of the
claim application till its realization. The Tribunal also waived
out interest on the future prospect.
3. In support of the appeal, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant contended that compensation awarded towards
non-pecuniary damages is on the higher side. It is also
contended that since post-mortem of the deceased was never
conducted, in absence of the cause of death, the claim
application should not have been entertained.
4. Even though learned counsel for the claimant-respondent
supported the impugned award, but in course of hearing
contended that the claimant-respondent will be fully
satisfied if this Court will reduce the compensation amount
to Rs.12,50,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum
payable from the date of filing of the claim application till its
realization. With regard to waive out interest on future
prospect, 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
Claimant-respondent to the discretion of this Court. But it
is contended that right of recovery so allowed by the Tribunal
be confirmed.
6. Learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.3 on the
other contended that if this Court is inclined to confirm right
of recovery, then in the event any application will be moved
to execute that right, Respondent No.3 be given due
opportunity of hearing.
7. 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 interest on future prospect so awarded by the
Tribunal and reduce the compensation to Rs.12,50,000/-
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.12,50,000/- 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.
7.1. It is observed that on such deposit of the amount,
the Tribunal shall do well to disburse the same in favour of
the claimant-respondent in terms of the judgment
dt.23.11.2023.
7.2. 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.12,50,000/- shall carry interest @7% per annum
payable from the date of expiry of the period of 8 (eight)
weeks till it is so deposited.
7.3. It is further observed that in the event of any
application being filed by the appellant-company seeking
recovery of the amount from the owner-Respondent NO.3,
the Tribunal shall give due opportunity of hearing to owner-
Respondent NO.3 in that regard and decide the same in
accordance with law.
7.4. It is observed that only after deposit of the amount
as directed, Appellant-Company shall be permitted to take
refund of the statutory deposit along with accrued interest,
if any, on proper identification.
7.5. The MACA accordingly stands disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
Sangita
Reason: authentication of order
Location: high court of orissa, cuttack
Date: 08-Apr-2025 16:50:33
