The Divisional Manager vs Suphala Dash And Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 4011 Ori

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 4011 Ori
Judgement Date : 14 February, 2025

Orissa High Court

The Divisional Manager vs Suphala Dash And Others on 14 February, 2025

Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                           MACA No.1280 of 2024

        The Divisional Manager,
        National Insurance
        Company Ltd., Sambalpur              ....                    Appellant
                                                       Mr. M. Sinha, Advocate


                              -versus-
        Suphala Dash and Others
                                 ....                              Respondents
                                      Mr. P.K. Mishra, Advocate for R-1 and 2


                             CORAM:
                  JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
                                            ORDER

14.02.2025 I.A. No.2776 of 2024 Order No.

01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. Considering the grounds taken, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned subject to payment of cost of Rs.1000/- to be deposited before the Orissa High Court Bar Association Welfare Fund by 19.02.2025.

4. I.A. is disposed of.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

P.T.O. // 2 //

1. Heard Mr. M. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Company and Mr. P.K. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2- Claimants.

2. This appeal has been filed by the Appellant- Company challenging Judgment dtd.22.02.2024 so passed by the learned District Judge-cum-1st MACT, Bargarh in MAC Case No.20 of 2021. Vide the said Judgment the Tribunal assessed the compensation at Rs.8,83,980/- 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.8,83,980/-, the Tribunal never take into consideration as to whether the offending Hero Pleasure bearing Registration No. OD-31-B-0803 caused the accident on 14.03.2016 and whether due to the rash and negligent driving of the accused driver, accident 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.8,83,980/-.

// 3 //

2.2. In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellant-company contended that the Tribunal without proper appreciation also awarded compensation along with interest @ 7% per annum, which is also 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. It is also contended that the driver of the offending vehicle was not having valid Driving License and on the face of such document being produced, the Tribunal did not allow right of recovery.

3. Even though Mr. P.K. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the Claimant-Respondents Nos.1 and 2 supported the impugned award, but in course of hearing contended that the Claimant-Respondents Nos.1 and 2 will have no grievance, if the compensation amount will be reduced to Rs.7,75,000/-, with interest @ 6% per annum payable from the date of application till its realization.

4. Mr. M. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Company left the aforesaid proposition made

// 4 //

by the learned counsel for the Claimant-Respondents Nos.1 and 2 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.22.02.2024 is inclined to reduce the same and held the Claimant- Respondents Nos.1 and 2 entitled to get compensation amount of Rs.7,75,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum payable from the date of filing of the application till its realization. This Court also allows right of recovery as against owner-Respondent No.3. 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. On such deposit of the amount, learned tribunal shall do well to disburse the amount proportionately in terms of the judgment dated 22.02.2024 in favour of the Claimant-Respondents Nos.1 and 2.

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.7,75,000/- 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 //

5.2. Since this Court is allowing right of recovery as against Respondent No.3, it is observed that if any such application is moved by the Appellant to recover the amount from the Owner-Respondent No.3, 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