Partly allowed

The Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Laxmipriya Parida @ Sarojini Parida

Orissa HC5 Jul 2023MACA/296/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this appeal by an insurer, the Division Bench directed confirmation of a motor accident compensation award but corrected the interest rate from 7% to 6% and clarified the correct name of the deceased claimant.

What did the court decide?

Interest rate reduced from 7% to 6% per annum from date of filing; Appellant directed to deposit compensation amount before the tribunal within two months.

The Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Laxmipriya… — Insurance | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK MACA No.296 of 2020

¶2

The Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Badambadi, Cuttack

¶3

-versus-

¶4

Laxmipriya Parida @ Sarojini Parida and Others

¶5

…. Respondents

¶6

Mr. P.K. Mishra, counsel for Respondents 1 to 5

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY

ORDER 5.7.2023

Order No.

The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶13

Heard Mr. N.S. Ghose, learned counsel for the insurer – Appellant and Mr. P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the claimant – Respondents.

¶14

Present appeal by the insurer – Appellant is directed against the impugned judgment dated 29^th October, 2019 of learned 3^rd MACT, Jagatsinghpur passed in MAC No.23 of 2006, wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.5,90,000/- along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 3^rd March, 2006 has been granted on account of death of deceased Mama @ Sasmita Parida in the motor vehicular accident dated 30^th January, 2006.

¶15

Mr. Ghose submits that the name of the deceased was Mama @ Rasmita Parida and not Sasmita Parida as stated by the claimants. It is accordingly submitted that since the name of the deceased has not been mentioned correctly, the impugned award is unsustainable and

¶16

the claimants are not entitled for any compensation as Sasmita did not die in the accident.

¶17

Admittedly Rasmita Parida and Sasmita Parida are two sisters being the daughters of Mahendra Parida and Laxmipriya Parida. In the motor vehicular accident dated 30^th January 2006 involving the offending vehicle, i.e. Bus bearing registration number OR-05-G1789, Mama @ Rasmita Parida died. These facts are admitted by both the counsels and no dispute is there about death of Mama @ Rasmita Parida in the accident.

¶18

Mr. Mishra submits that the name of the deceased has been inadvertently mentioned in the F.I.R and other police papers as Mama @ Sasmita instead of Mama @ Rasmita. It is further submitted that the parents being illiterate persons belonging to poor stratum of society could not rectify the mistake due to ignorance. Accordingly the name of the deceased remained uncorrected as such.

¶19

Upon hearing both parties and considering the peculiar facts, particularly the admitted fact that the name of the deceased is Mama @ Rasmita who is the daughter of same parents, I do not feel any reason to set aside the impugned award on that ground only. It needs to be stated here that no other ground has been pressed by the Appellant to challenge the award. Keeping in view the beneficial intention of the statute, the name of the deceased is corrected as Mama @ Rasmita Parida instead of Mama @ Sasmita Parida. Accordingly, the name of claimant – Respondent No.3 is corrected as Sasmita Parida.

¶20

The impugned award of the tribunal is confirmed accordingly. However, the rate of interest is reduced to 6% from 7%.

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

In the result the appeal is disposed of with a direction to the insurer – Appellant to deposit the entire compensation amount of Rs.5,90,000/- (five lakhs ninety thousand) before the tribunal along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e. 3^rd March 2006, within a period of two months from today; where-after the same shall be disbursed in favour of the claimant – Respondents on same terms and proportion as contained in the impugned judgment.

¶23

The statutory deposit made by the appellant before this court along with accrued interest thereof be refunded to the Appellant on proper application and on production of proof of deposit of the awarded amount before the tribunal

¶24

An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.

¶25

M.K.Panda

¶26

( B.P. Routray)
Judge

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Page 3 of 3

¶29

Digitally Signed Signed by: MANAS KUMAR PANDA Designation: Senior Steno Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, Cuttack Date: 07-Jul-2023 10:41:23

The Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Laxmipriya Parida @ Sarojini Parida

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Laxmipriya Parida @ Sarojini Parida

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

O.I.Co.Ltd Vs Sailabala Pradhan

Prashant Ku.Meher Vs Dhurba Ch.Nayak andANR

Keshari Swain and Ors. Vs D.M.,O.I.Co.Ltd.

Union of India Vs Tasil Minja

Divisional Manager,Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Kabitanjali Sahu

Bishnu Priya Baral Vs Manas Ranjan Swain