Divisional vs Nirupama Bose & Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 478 Ori

Orissa High Court

Divisional vs Nirupama Bose & Ors on 12 May, 2025

Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                     MACA No.120 of 2025
 Divisional, Cholamandalam          .....      Appellant
 M/s. General Insurance                   Mr. A.A. Khan, Advocate
 Company Limited
                           -versus-
 Nirupama Bose & Ors.             .....      Respondents
                                                 Mr. D. Patnaik, Advocate
                                                  (Respondent Nos. 1 & 2)

                       CORAM:
 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
                        ORDER

12.05.2025 Order No.03 I.A. No. 336 of 2025

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Heard.

3. This application has been filed seeking time to pay the deficit court fee.

4. Learned counsel for the Appellant contended that deficit court fee has already been paid in the meantime.

5. In view of the same, while disposing the I.A., this Court directs the Office to accept the deficit court fee.

6. I.A. accordingly stands disposed of.

(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge

1. Heard Mr. A.A. Khan, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Company and Mr. D. Patnaik, learned counsel appearing for the Claimants-Respondent Nos. 1 & 2.

2. The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant-Company challenging Judgment dtd.20.09.2024 so passed by the learned 1st MACT, Kendrapara in MAC Case No. 100 of 2016. Vide the said Judgment the Tribunal assessed the compensation at Rs.11,80,000/- along with interest @ 7% per annum payable from the date of filing of the claim application till its realization.

3. In support of the appeal, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Company contended that since the deceased along with his friend were travelling as gratuitous passengers in the offending vehicle, Appellant-Company is not liable to pay the compensation and the Tribunal should have saddled the liability on the Owner- Respondent No. 3 in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Vs Swaran Sing & Ors..

3.1. It is also contended that the Tribunal while assessing the compensation, without having any documentary evidence, instead of taking the monthly income of the deceased as per the minimum wages of an unskilled labour prevailing at the relevant time, wrongly held the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/-, which is not at all sustainable in the eye of law.

3.2. It is also contended that the Tribunal while assessing the compensation, wrongly awarded Rs.1,00,000/- under the heading of general damages instead of awarding Rs.30,000/-, which is contrary to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranaya Sethi.

3.3. It is also contended that the Tribunal instead of exempting the Appellant-Company from paying the compensation, only awarded right of recovery as against Owner-Respondent No. 3. It is also

contended that Respondent No. 3 was set ex parte before the Tribunal and challenging the right of recovery, Respondent No. 3 has not filed any appeal.

3.4. Making all these submissions learned counsel appearing for the Appellant contended that had the Tribunal properly appreciated the aforesaid contention of the learned counsel for 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.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the Claimants/Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 though supported the impugned award, but in course of hearing contended that the Claimants-Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 will be fully satisfied, if this Court will assess the compensation amount at Rs.9,80,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum payable from the date of filing of the claim application till its realization.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Company while left the aforesaid proposition made by the learned counsel for the Claimants-Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 to the discretion of this Court, contended that right of recovery so allowed by the Tribunal as against Owner-Respondent No. 3 be confirmed.

6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court while interfering with the impugned judgment, is inclined to held the Claimants- Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 entitled to get compensation amount of Rs.9,80,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum payable from the date of application till its realization and confirm the right of recovery as against Owner-Respondent No. 3. While holding so, this Court directs the Appellant-Company to deposit the compensation

amount of Rs.9,80,000/- 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 Claimants- Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 proportionately in terms of the Judgement dtd.20.09.2024.

6.1. 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.9,80,000/- shall carry interest @ 7% starting from the expiry of the period of eight (8) weeks till the amount is so deposited.

6.2. It is also observed that, if any application will be filed by the Appellant seeking recovery of the compensation from Owner/Respondent No. 3, the same be considered and disposed of in accordance with law and by giving due opportunity of hearing to Respondent No. 3.

6.3. Account Payee Cheque not yet invested be returned back to the learned counsel appearing for the Appellant, after satisfaction of the award in terms of the present order on proper identification.

7. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge

Sneha

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 15-May-2025 13:11:41