ORISSA HIGH COURT: CUTTACK M.A.C.A. No.287 of 2009 From an award dated 24.01.2009 passed by Shri G.S.Panigrahi, LL.B., 1st Addl. District Judge-cum-1st M.A.C.T., Cuttack in Misc. Case No.586 of 2002. ----------------- Divisional Manager, M/s New India Assurance Co. Ltd., AT: Badambadi, Dist: Cuttack … Appellant. -Versus- Smt. Kaminibala Mohanty, & others … Respondents. For Appellant : Mr. Debasis Das For Opp. Parties : Mr.S.N.Kar (For respondent Nos. 1 to 3) ----------- P R E S E N T : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. MAHAPATRA Heard and disposed of on 31.03.2011 B.N.Mahapatra, J. This appeal has been directed against the award dated 24.01.2009 passed by 1st Addl. District Judge-cum-1st M.A.C.T., Cuttack in Misc. Case No.586 of 2002. 2. The facts of the case in a nutshell is that on 20.05.2002 at about 11.30 P.M. the offending truck bearing registration No.OR-05-D-2522 came in high speed and dashed against the trekker bearing registration No.OR-02-C-5887 as a result of which one Dibakar Mohanty, who was one of the occupants of the trekker sustained serious injuries on his person. Thereafter, he was immediately shifted to S.C.B. Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack and succumbed to injuries there. At the time of death, Dibakar Mohanty was 44 years old and was working as a Supervisor in M/s Konark Commercial Company, Kolkata. His monthly salary was 5,500/- with usual bonus. The respondent-claimants filed the claim application making the registered owner of the truck and insurer of the said vehicle jointly and severally liable to pay compensation amount with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till its realization. Before the Tribunal, the owner of the vehicle was set ex-parte. The insurer without disputing about the accident took the stand that the accident occurred because of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the trekker. It denied to have insured the offending vehicle. The Insurance Company also disputed the age and income of the deceased. As many as five witnesses were examined in support of the case of the claimants. O.P. No.3- Insurance Company examined one witnesses and O.P. No.2 has not examined any witness. The claimants have produced nine documents which have been exhibited as Exts. 1 to 9. O.P. No.3 exhibited thirteen documents, which were examined as Exts.A to J. 3. After taking into consideration the oral as well as documentary evidence, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the death of deceased Dibakar Mohanty due to rash and negligent driving of both the vehicles on the date of accident. The Tribunal further held that O.P. No.3, who is insurer, is alone liable to pay compensation to the claimants. Income of the deceased was assessed at Rs.2,500/-. Applying 15 multiplier, the learned Tribunal determined the amount of compensation at Rs.3,00,000/-. In addition to that, a sum of Rs.9,500/- was awarded towards funeral 2 expenses, loss of estate and loss of consortium. Thus, the total amount of compensation determined at Rs.3,09,500/-. 4. Learned Tribunal directed O.P. No.3-Insurance Company to pay the awarded amount along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition, i.e., 08.08.2002 till realization. The insurer was also directed to pay a cost of Rs.500/-. A portion of the awarded amount was directed to be kept in fixed deposit with certain conditions. 5. Though several grounds have been taken in the appeal memo, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant confined his argument to the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal. According to the learned counsel, the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.3,09.500/- is extremely high and excessive. 6. Mr.S.N.Kar, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper. By a well reasoned order, the Tribunal had determined the amount of compensation at Rs.3,09,500/-. It is further submitted that the accident took place on 20.05.2002 and for more than eight years the claimants are suffering. Therefore, for the interest of justice the matter may be decided in the spirit of Lok Adalat. To such prayer of the respondents, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company has no objection. 7. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and going through the impugned judgment, this Court feels that a compensation amount of Rs.2,80,000/- would be the just and proper compensation in the facts and in the circumstances of the case. 3 8. In view of the above, this Court directs the appellant Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount of Rs.2,80,000/- along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum before the Tribunal within a period of two months from today. On deposit of the said amount, the Tribunal shall disburse the same to the claimants in the manner it has directed in its order. 9. On production of evidence in support of payment of the awarded amount along with interest before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court, the statutory deposit of Rs.25,000/- along with interest shall be refunded to the appellant-Insurance Company. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. ..…………………….. B.N.Mahapatra, J 4 Orissa High Court, Cuttack Dated 31st March, 2011/ss/skj/ssd