Allowed

Sanjay Ku.Biswas v. Gupteswar Sahu

Orissa HC7 Dec 2024MACA/521/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal for enhancement of compensation in a motor accident claim case. The Court interfered with the MACT award and granted a consolidated further compensation of Rs. 7,50,000/- to the appellant-claimants, directing the respondent company to deposit the amount with the Tribunal within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Enhancement of compensation by Rs. 7,50,000/- directed to be deposited with the Tribunal within 8 weeks.

Sanjay Ku.Biswas Vs Gupteswar Sahu — Motor Accident Claims | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

MACA No.521 of 2017

¶3

Sanjay Kumar Biswas and Others

¶4

..... Appellants Mr. R.L. Pattnaik, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Gupteswar Sahu & Anr. ..... Respondents Mr. G.P. Dutta, Advocate (Respondent No. 2)

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER

¶9

07.12.2024

¶10

Order No. 07

¶11

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶12

Heard Mr. R.L. Pattnaik, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Claimants and Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 2-Company.

¶13

The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant-Claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation so awarded by the learned District Judge-cum-1^st MACT, Nabarangpur vide Judgment dtd.03.09.2016 in MAC Case No.1/2016.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Claimant contended that on the face of the claim made to the tune of Rs.24,00,000/-, the Tribunal without proper appreciation of the materials placed before it, only awarded compensation amount of Rs.20,25,000/- along with interest @ 7% per annum payable from the date of filing of the application till its realization.

¶15

Page 1 of 3.

¶16

4.1. It is contended that while assessing the compensation so awarded, appropriate compensation was not awarded towards future prospect taking into account the age of the deceased. It is contended that taking into account age of the deceased at 27 years and the deceased being a govt. employee, future prospect at 50% should have been assessed. But the tribunal wrongly held the future prospect at Rs.3,00,000/-, even though the same should have been assessed at Rs.8,50,000/-. It is accordingly contended that had the Tribunal properly appreciated the materials placed before it, the Appellant-Claimant would have been awarded higher compensation towards future prospect, so awarded vide the impugned Judgment. Appellant would have also been entitled to get the excess amount towards future prospect along with interest payable from the date of application till its realisation.

¶17

4.2. However, in course of hearing learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Claimant contended that if this Court will allow further compensation amount of Rs.7,50,000/- consolidated, ends of justice will be met.

¶18

Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 2-Company though supported the impugned award but to the submission made for award of further compensation of Rs.7,50,000/- consolidated by the learned counsel for Appellant, leave the same to the discretion of this Court.

¶19

Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court while interfering with the impugned award, is inclined to dispose of the appeal by holding that the Appellants-Claimants are entitled to get further

¶20

Page 2 of 3.

¶21

compensation amount of Rs.7,50,000/- consolidated. While holding so, this Court directs Respondent No. 2-Company to deposit the aforesaid compensation amount of Rs.7,50,000/- consolidated 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 Appellants-Claimants in terms of the Judgment dtd.03.09.2016.

¶22

6.1. However, it is observed that if the amount as directed is not deposited by Respondent No.2 within the aforesaid time period, the compensation amount of Rs.7,50,000/- 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.

¶23

The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

¶24

(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge

¶25

Basudev

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASUDEV SWAIN Page 3 of 3. Designation: SR. STENO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 11-Dec-2024 11:03:15

Sanjay Ku.Biswas v. Gupteswar Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Ku.Biswas v. Gupteswar Sahu

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

Paradeep Phosphates Vs L.A. Collector

Paradeep Phosphates Vs L.A. Collector

Paradeep Phosphates Vs Land Acquisition

Sachidananda Panigrahi Vs Ratna Giri

Sanjay Ku.Singhal Vs Hemalata Naik

Icici Lombard motor Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Jayakrushna Sahoo