D.M vs Prabhasini Rout & Anr
2025 Latest Caselaw 7488 Ori

Orissa High Court

D.M vs Prabhasini Rout & Anr on 24 April, 2025

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                      MACA Nos. 1 & 8 OF 2025
                        MACA No. 1 of 2025

       From the Judgment/Order dated 30.09.2024passed by the
    learned 1st Addl. Dist. Judge-cum-1st MACT, Cuttack in MAC
    Case No.1409 of 2019.

    D.M., Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. ::::        Appellant
    (TP HUB), Bhubaneswar
                                   -:: VERSUS ::-

    Prabhasini Rout & Anr.                      ::::        Respondents


    For Appellant           ::::   Mr. G.P. Dutta, Advocate

    For Respondents         ::::   Mr. S.K. Dash, Advocate
                                   (Respondent No. 1)
                                   (In MACA No. 1 of 2025)
                                   Mr. B.P. Mohanty, Advocate
                                   (Respondent Nos. 1 & 2)
                                   (In MACA No. 8 of 2025)

                                   .........

PRESENT :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNASATAPATHY

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date of Hearing- 24.04.2025:: Date of Judgment- 24.04.2025

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- B.P. Satapathy, J. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties.

// 2 //

3. Since both the appeals arise out of a common judgment passed by the learned Addl. District Judge-cum-5th MACT, Athgarh in MAC Case Nos. 42/2021 and 83/2023, both the matters were heard analogously and disposed of by the present common order.

4. The Tribunal while disposing both the claim applications, awarded compensation amount of Rs.1,39,58,856/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till its realization.

4.1. Out of the aforesaid compensation amount of Rs.1,39,58,856/-, the Tribunal allowed compensation to the tune of Rs.49,58,856/- in favour of Claimant No. 1 in MAC Case No. 42 of 2021. The Tribunal allowed a sum of Rs.47,00,000/- in favour of Claimant No. 2 in the said MAC Case No. 42 of 2021. Similarly, the Tribunal allowed a sum of Rs.43,00,000/- in favour of the Claimants in MAC No. 83 of 2023.

4.2. While assailing the compensation so awarded by the Tribunal, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant contended that the Tribunal committed a wrong by taking the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.71,843/-, taking into account the salary drawn by the deceased for the month of March, 2021. It is contended that taking into account the salary slip exhibited by the Appellants vide Ext. B, B/1 & B/2 i.e. the salary statement of the deceased for the month of January, February & March, 2021, the average of the salary drawn by the deceased during the month of January to March, 2021 should have been taken as the monthly income of the deceased.

// 3 //

4.3. However, the Tribunal relying on the salary drawn by the deceased in the month of March, 2021, took the same as income of the deceased and calculated the compensation. It is accordingly contended that because of such wrong committed by the Tribunal, the compensation since has been assessed at a higher side, it is not sustainable in the eye of law.

4.4. It is also contended that the Tribunal while assessing the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.71,843/-, never deducted the required amount towards income tax as per the Income Tax Slab prescribed for the Assessment Year 2022-23. It is also contended that since the Claimants received a sum of Rs.40,00,000/- towards Army Group Insurance Fund as exhibited vide Ext. D, the said amount should have been adjusted from the compensation amount so awarded. A further submission was also made that the Tribunal committed wrong in awarding Rs.1,64,000/- towards non-pecuniary damages in place of Rs.70,000/-, so decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court in a decision reported in 2023 (II) TAC 713. It is also contended that award of interest @ 9% per annum on the compensation amount is on the higher side taking into account the prevailing bank interest rate. Making all these submissions, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant contended that the impugned award needs interference of this Court.

5. Mr. S.K. Dash, learned counsel appearing for the Claimant- Respondent No. 1 in MACA No. 1/2025 and Mr. B.P. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the Claimants-Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 in MACA No. 8/2025 on the other hand while supporting the

// 4 //

impugned award, contended that since the deceased was working as a Havildar in the Indian Army, the Tribunal has rightly taken the last month salary as the income of the deceased and the same has been rightly done in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarala Verma (AIR 2009 SC 3104).

5.1. It is also contended that payment of the benefit from Army Group Insurance Fund is not liable for deduction, as the deceased being a member of the said fund, was paying a sum of Rs.2,500/- each month and the same was deducted from the monthly salary of the deceased. It is contended that since amount of Rs.40,00,000/- is not an ex-gratia and it is a fund duly released in favour of the Claimants, taking into account the premium paid by the deceased every month, the same amount is not liable for deduction as contended by the learned counsel appearing for the Appellant.

5.2. A further submission was also made that since the deceased died on 10.04.2021 in course of his employment, salary drawn by him in the month of March has been rightly taken as the income of the deceased. It is also contended that the deceased having been in employment in Indian Army, he was getting all the facilities including rations and all day today requirement free of costs.

5.3. It is also contended that since the income reflected in the salary statement for the month of March was arrived at after deducting the TDS, no further deduction is required to be made as contended.

5.4. Making all these submissions, learned counsel appearing for the Claimants-Respondents in both the appeals contended that the

// 5 //

impugned award has been rightly passed and it needs no interference.

A further submission was however made by the learned counsel appearing for the Claimants in MAC No. 83 of 2023 to re- determine her share as it is contended that her share has not been properly made by the Tribunal, in its judgment dtd.31.08.2024.

5.5. However, while supporting the impugned award, learned counsel appearing for the Claimants-Respondents in both the appeals contended that if this Court will award compensation amount to the tune of Rs.1,10,00,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum payable from the date of application till its realization, the Claimants-Respondents will have no further grievance.

6. Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant- Company left the aforesaid proposition made by the learned counsel for the Claimants-Respondents in both the appeals to the discretion of this Court.

7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court while interfering with the impugned Judgment dtd.31.08.2024, held the Claimants- Respondents in both the claim cases in MAC Nos. 42/2021 and 83/2023 entitled to get compensation amount of Rs.1,10,00,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum, payable from the date of filing of the claim application till its realization. This Court accordingly while holding so, directs the Appellant-Company to deposit the compensation amount of Rs.1,10,00,000/- along with interest @ 6%

// 6 //

per annum payable from the date of filing of the claim application till its realization within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. On such deposit of the amount, the Tribunal shall disburse the same in favour of Claimants-Respondents, but by re-determining the share of the Claimant in MAC No. 83 of 2023.

7.1. However, it is observed that if the amount as directed will not be deposited by the Appellant-Company within the aforesaid time period of eight (8) weeks, the compensation amount of Rs.1,10,00,000/- shall carry interest @ 7% per annum for the period starting from the expiry of the period of eight (8) weeks till its payment.

7.2. On such deposit of the amount, the Appellant-Company shall be permitted to take back the statutory deposit along with accrued interest if any from the Registry on proper identification.

8. Both the appeals are accordingly disposed of.

9. Photo copy of the order be placed in the connected case record.

(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge

Orissa High Court, Cuttack The 24th April, 2025/Sneha

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack