Orissa High Court
D.M vs Laxmi Behera & Ors on 24 July, 2025
Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.310 of 2024
D.M., M/s. National Insurance ..... Appellant
Co., Ltd, Sambalpur Mr. B. Dasmohapatra, Adv.
-versus-
Laxmi Behera & Ors. ..... Respondents
Mr. P.K. Nayak, Advocate
( for Respondent Nos.1 & 2)
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
24.07.2025
Order No. 05 I.A. No.841 of 2024
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Perused the tracking report. Since notice has been duly served on
Respondent No.3, notice against the said Respondent is treated as
sufficient.
3. Heard.
4. Considering the grounds taken in the I.A., the delay in filing of
the appeal is condoned subject to payment of cost of Rs.1,500/- to
be paid before the Orissa High Court Bar Association Welfare Fund
by 30.07.2025.
5. Accordingly, the I.A stands disposed of.
(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY)
Judge
1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties.
2. This is an application with a prayer to accept the documents
enclose to the I.A as an Addl. Affidavit.
3. Considering the grounds taken, the prayer is allowed. D.L. of the
accused driver be taken as an additional evidence for the purpose of
disposal of the appeal.
4. Accordingly, the I.A stands disposed of.
(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY)
Judge
1. Perused the tracking report. Since notice has been duly served on
Respondent No.3, notice against the said Respondent is treated as
sufficient.
2. Heard.
3. This appeal has been filed challenging the Judgment
dtd.28.07.2023 so passed by the learned Addl. District Judge-cum-
7th M.A.C.T., Kantabanjhi in MAC Case No. 1 of 2020. Vide the
said Judgment the Tribunal assessed the compensation at
Rs.11,70,592/- along with interest @ 7% per annum payable from
the date of filing of the claim application till its realization.
4. In support of the appeal, learned counsel appearing for the
Appellant contended that since the accident occurred due to the
involvement of both the vehicles because of head on collision,
contributory negligence on the part of the deceased should have
been taken into consideration, but the said fact was completely
ignored.
4.1. It is also contended that from the document accepted as an
additional evidence i.e. DL of the accused driver in the connected
MACA No.907 of 2023, it is evident that the Driver was allowed to
drive transport vehicle w.e.f. 30.09.2019. But the accident
admittedly has taken place on 05.04.2019. Therefore, right of
recovery be allowed as against Owner-Respondent No.4.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the Claimants-Respondents
though on the other hand supported the impugned Judgment and
contended that the Tribunal has rightly assessed the compensation,
but in course of hearing learned counsel appearing for the
Claimants-Respondents contended that the Claimants-Respondents
will be fully satisfied, if this Court will assess the compensation
amount at Rs.10,70,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum
payable from the date of filing of the claim application till its
realization.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Company left the
aforesaid proposition made by the learned counsel for the
Claimants-Respondents to the discretion of this Court, contended
that right of recovery be allowed as against Owner-Respondent
No.4, as the driver of the offending vehicle was not having valid DL
as on the date of accident.
7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and
considering the submissions made, this Court is inclined to held the
Claimants-Respondents entitled to get compensation amount of
Rs.10,70,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum payable from
the date of application till its realization. While holding so, this
Court directs the Appellant-Company to deposit the compensation
amount of Rs.10,70,000/- along with interest @ 6% interest per
annum payable from the date of filing of the claim application till its
realization before the Tribunal 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 the Respondents in
terms of the Judgement dtd.28.07.2023.
7.1. However, it is observed that if the amount as directed is not
deposited within the aforesaid time period of eight (8) weeks, the
compensation amount of Rs.10,70,000/- shall carry interest @ 7%
starting from the expiry of the period of eight (8) weeks till the
amount is so deposited.
7.2. This Court taking into account the DL of the accused driver
taken as additional evidence since finds that the driver of the
offending vehicle was allowed to drive transport vehicle w.e.f.
30.09.2019 and the accident has taken place on 05.04.2019, is of the
view that the driver was not having valid D.L. Therefore, this Court
on the ground of violation of the policy condition is inclined to
allow right of recovery as against Respondent No.4.
7.3. It is however observed that if any application will be filed by
the Appellant seeking recovery of the compensation from
Owner/Respondent No.4, the same be considered and disposed of in
accordance with law and by giving due opportunity of hearing to
Respondent No.4.
7.4. 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. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY)
Judge
Subrat
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
