Orissa High Court
Manager vs Jana Jal & Anr on 6 January, 2025
Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.333 of 2018
Manager, Oriental Insurance ..... Appellant
Co. Ltd. Mr. S. Satpathy, Advocate
-versus-
Jana Jal & Anr. ..... Respondents
Mr. P.R. Patnaik, Advocate
(Respondent No. 1)
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
06.01.2025
Order No. 08 Misc. Case No. 552 of 2018
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties.
3. Considering the grounds taken, delay in filing the appeal is
condoned.
4. Misc. Case is disposed of.
(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY)
Judge
09. MACA No. 333 of 2018
1. Heard Mr. S. Satpathy, learned counsel appearing for the
Appellant-Company and Mr. P.R. Patnaik, learned counsel appearing
for Respondent No. 1.
2. This appeal has been filed challenging Judgment dtd.23.11.2017
so passed by the learned District Judge-cum-1st MACT, Bolangir in
MAC No. 10/1990.
3. Learned counsel for the Appellant-Company vehemently
contended that even though the offending vehicle was not having the
valid policy, but in absence of the same the Tribunal allowed the
claim by directing the Appellant-Company to pay compensation
amount of Rs.60,000/- along with interest @ 9% per annum payable
from the date of filing of the application till its realization.
3.1. It is also contended that because of the accident the Injured
remained under medical treatment in a Govt. Hospital for the period
from 19.08.1989 to 29.08.1989. It is contended that since the Injured
was treated in the Govt. Hospital and that too for a period of 10 days,
compensation amount of Rs.60,000/- and that too with interest @ 9%
per annum is on the higher side. It is accordingly contended that the
impugned judgment needs interference of this Court.
4. Mr. P.R. Patnaik, learned counsel appearing for the Claimant-
Respondent on the other hand contended that taking into account the
suffering of the Injured for around 10 days and subsequent treatment
that is required, the Tribunal rightly assessed the compensation. It is
also contended that after remand of the matter by this Court even
though Appellant-Company was given opportunity to lead evidence
with regard to the fact that the offending vehicle was not having the
valid policy, but nothing was pleaded nor any evidence was laid to
that effect.
4.1. However, in course of hearing learned counsel for the Claimant-
Respondent contended that the Claimant-Respondent will be fully
satisfied, if this Court will allow compensation to the tune of
Rs.1,25,000/- consolidated.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Company leave the
aforesaid proposition to the discretion of this Court.
6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and even
though notice has not been made sufficient on the Owner-
Respondent No. 2, but considering the submission made, this Court
while interfering with the impugned Judgment, held the Claimant-
Respondent No. 1 entitled to get compensation amount of
Rs.1,25,000/- consolidated. This Court accordingly directs the
Appellant-Company to deposit the aforesaid compensation amount of
Rs.1,25,000/- before the Tribunal within a period of eight (8) weeks
from the date of receipt of this order. On deposit of the amount, the
entire amount be released in favour of the Claimant-Respondent No.
6.1. However, this Court is not inclined to grant any right of recovery
against Respondent No. 2, as the claim made by the Appellant that
the vehicle was not having valid policy, was neither pleaded before
the Tribunal nor any evidence was laid in that regard.
6. However, it is observed that if the amount as directed is not
deposited within the aforesaid time period, the compensation amount
of Rs.1,25,000/- consolidated will carry interest @ 6% per annum
payable for the period starting from the expiry of the period of eight
(8) weeks till the amount is so deposited. Only after deposit of the
awarded amount, Appellant be permitted to take refund of the
statutory deposit along with accrued interest if any from the Registry
of this Court on proper identification.
7. The appeal accordingly stand disposed of.
(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY)
Judge
Sneha
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
