National Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Rasmita Sahu

3. This appeal has been filed by the Appellant–Company challenging the judgment dt.16.08.2018 so passed by the learned Addl. District Judge-cum-4^th MACT, Angul in MAC No.71 of 2016. Vide the said Judgment, the Tribunal assessed compensation at Rs.75,23,080/- along with interest @6% per annum payable from the date of filing of the claim application till its realization.

¶14

4. In support of the appeal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended the gross salary of the deceased so reflected in Ext.5 though includes various allowances, but instead of deducting the same, the tribunal accepted the gross income reflected in Ext.5 as the monthly income of the deceased. It is also contended that the tribunal wrongly

¶15

allowed 50% towards future prospect which is on the higher side.

¶16

4. 1. It is further contended that the wife of the deceased since has got the benefit of appointment on compassionate ground in MCL, the compensation should have been assessed accordingly.

¶17

4.2. Making all these submissions, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-company contended that the impugned award needs interference of this Court.

¶18

5. Even though learned counsel for the claimantsrespondents supported the impugned award, but in course of hearing contended that the claimants-respondents will be fully satisfied if this Court will reduce the compensation amount to Rs.68,00,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum payable from the date of filing of the claim application till its realization.

¶19

6. Learned counsel appearing for the Appellantcompany left the aforesaid proposition made by the learned counsel for the Claimants-respondents to the discretion of this Court.

¶20

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submission made, this Court while interfering with the impugned judgment is inclined to reduce the compensation to Rs.68,00,000/-along with interest @6% per annum payable from the date of application till its realization. This Court accordingly directs the Appellant-Company to deposit compensation amount of Rs.68,00,000/- along with interest @6% per annum payable from the date of application till its realization within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

¶21

7.1. It is observed that on such deposit of the amount, the Tribunal shall do well to disburse the same in favour of the Claimants-Respondents proportionately in terms of the judgment dt.16.08.2018.

¶22

7.2. It is further observed that if the Appellant-Company will fail to deposit the compensation amount within the time stipulated here-in-above, the compensation amount of Rs.68,00,000/- shall carry interest @7% per annum payable from the date of expiry of the period of 8 (eight) weeks till it is so deposited.

¶23

7.3. It is observed that Account Payee Cheque so deposited by the appellant company and not yet invested be returned back after satisfaction of the award.

¶24

7.4. The MACA accordingly stands disposed of.

¶25

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

¶26

Sangita

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANGITA PATRA Reason: authentication of order Location: high court of orissa, cut tack Date: 24-May-2025 13:21:29

National Insurance Co.Ltd. v. Rasmita Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

National Insurance Co.Ltd. v. Rasmita Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Project Committee, Pani Panchayat, Ujip, Nuapada Vs State of Odisha

Jhunalata Nayak Vs Collector,Puri and Ors.

Jyotsna Danta Vs Sub-Collector,Sonep

Sanatan Jena Vs State of Odisha

Prafulla Chandra Maharana Vs State of Odisha

Ramesh Chandra Sarangi Vs State of Odisha