Orissa High Court
M/S. New India Assurance vs Puspa Kisan And Others on 13 February, 2025
Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.582 of 2024
M/s. New India Assurance
Co. Ltd.
.... Appellant
Mr. S.K. Sarangi, Sr. Advocate
-versus-
Puspa Kisan and Others .... Respondents
Mr. P.K. Nayak, Advocate for R-1 to 4
Mr. G.K. Rath, Advocate for R-5
CORAM:
JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
13.02.2025
I.A. No.1165 of 2024
Order No.
05. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/Physical) Mode.
2. Perused the tracking report. Since notice has been
duly served on Respondent No.6, notice against the said
Respondent is treated as sufficient.
3. Heard Mr. S.K. Sarangi, learned Sr. Counsel
appearing for the Appellant-Company, Mr. P.K. Nayak,
learned counsel appearing for the Respondents No.1 to
4-Claimants and Mr.G.K. Rath, Advocate for Respondent
No.5.
// 2 //
4. Considering the grounds taken, the delay in filing
the appeal is condoned.
5. I.A. stands disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. This appeal has been filed by the Appellant-
Company challenging Judgment dtd.07.02.2024 so
passed by the learned Addl. District and Sessions
Judge-cum-3rd MACT, Kuchinda, Sambalpur in MAC
Case No.24 of 2022. Vide the said Judgment the
Tribunal assessed the compensation at Rs.84,63,220/-
along with interest @ 7% per annum payable from the
date of filing of the claim application till its realization.
2.1. Learned counsel for the Appellant-Company
contended that while assessing the compensation at
Rs.84,63,220/-, the Tribunal never take into
consideration as to whether the offending motor cycle
bearing Registration No. OD-15A-4142 caused the
accident on 06.08.2022 and whether due to the rash
and negligent driving of the accused driver, accident
// 3 //
occurred, causing death of the deceased. It is contended
that even though such a plea was taken before the
Tribunal by the Appellant-Company, but the same was
never taken into consideration while assessing the
compensation at Rs.84,63,220/-.
2.2. It is also contended the Tribunal did not take into
consideration the stand taken by the Appellant that the
driver had no valid driving license at the time of alleged
occurrence and the tribunal also did not deduct the
income tax and professional tax from the income of the
deceased. It is also contended that the Tribunal without
proper appreciation of the stand taken by the appellant,
not only assessed the compensation at the higher side
but also awarded interest @ 7% per annum, which is on
the higher side.
2.3. Making all these submissions learned counsel
appearing for the Appellant-company contended that
had the Tribunal properly appreciated the stand of the
Appellant, the compensation amount so awarded would
have been on the lower side. It is accordingly contended
that the impugned award is not sustainable in the eye of
law and requires interference of this Court.
3. Even though Mr. P.K. Nayak, learned counsel
appearing for the Claimant-Respondents No.1 to 4
supported the impugned award, but in course of hearing
// 4 //
contended that the Claimant-Respondents No.1 to 4 will
have no grievance, if the compensation amount will be
reduced to Rs.79,00,000/-, with interest @ 6% per
annum so awarded by the tribunal.
4. Mr. S.K. Sarangi, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for
the Appellant-Company left the aforesaid proposition
made by the learned counsel for the Claimant-
Respondents No.1 to 4 to the discretion of this Court.
5. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the
Parties, considering the submissions made and after
going through the materials placed, this Court while
interfering with the impugned Judgment dtd.07.02.2024
is inclined to reduce the same and held the Claimant-
Respondents No.1 to 4 entitled to get compensation
amount of Rs.79,00,000/- with interest @ 6% per
annum payable from the date of filing of the application
till its realization. While holding so, this Court directs
the Appellant-Company to deposit the aforesaid
compensation amount along with interest within a
period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of this
order. This Court is however inclined to allow right of
recovery as against Owner-Respondent No.5. On such
deposit of the amount, the Tribunal shall disburse the
same in favour of the Claimant-Respondents No.1 to 4
proportionately in terms of the Judgment passed on
07.02.2024.
// 5 //
5.1. 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.79,00,000/- shall carry
interest @ 7% per annum for the period starting from
the expiry of the period of eight (8) weeks till it is
deposited before the Tribunal.
5.2. It is also observed that if any such application is
moved by the Appellant to recover the amount from the
Owner-Respondent, the Tribunal shall do well to dispose
of the application in accordance with law and by giving
due opportunity of hearing to Respondent-Owner.
5.3. It is observed that only after deposit of the amount
as directed, appellant will be permitted to take refund of
the statutory deposit along with accrued interest if any
from the Registry on proper identification.
6. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
Basudev
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
