MACA/1040/2025 of M/S. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,CUTTACK Vs SAMIR KUMAR ROUT @ SAMIREE ROUT on 3 September 2026

ORDER

03.09.2026 Order No. I.A. No.2254 of 2025

03.

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

2. This interlocutory application has been filed at the instance of the Appellant-Insurance Company with a prayer for condonation of delay of 83 days in filing of the appeal.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the Appellant-Insurance Company as well as learned counsel for the Respondent No.1- Claimant.

4. It is stated by the learned counsel for the Appellant- Insurance Company that there exists a delay of 83 days in filing of the appeal due to the procedural requirements of the Insurance Company.

5. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.1-Claimant, on the other hand, objected to the condonation of delay on the ground that the same has not been properly explained.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties as well as the grounds taken in the interlocutory application, the delay of 83 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned, subject to the payment of a cost of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) by the learned counsel for the Appellant-Insurance Company to the learned counsel for the Respondent No.1-Claimant. The said cost has been paid in Court today, and the learned counsel for the Respondent No.1- Claimant acknowledges receipt of the same.

7. The I.A. is disposed of. MACA No.1040 of 2025

8. On perusal of the office note, it appears that deficit court fees have already been paid.

9. Office is directed to accept the same.

10. Heard the learned counsel for the Appellant-Insurance Company as well as the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1-Claimant. Perused the appeal memo as well as the grounds stated therein.

11. By filing the present appeal under Section 173(1) of M.V. Act, 1988, the Appellant-Insurance Company seeks to challenge the judgment dated 27th February, 2025 passed by the 2nd Additional District Judge-cum-Judge, 3rd M.A.C.T., Cuttack in

M.A.C. Case No.931 of 2021.

12. By virtue of the impugned judgment/award, the learned Tribunal has awarded a total compensation amount of Rs.41,37,440/- along with interest @ 7% with a further direction for payment of default interest @ 12% per annum.

13. The brief fact of the case leading to filing of the preset appeal, in short, is that on 11.07.2019 at about 5.00 P.M. while the Respondent No.1-Claimant was going towards Narada from Palasudha by riding bicycle, on the way near Narada ring-road under Patkura Police Station, a Glamour motor cycle bearing Regd. No.OD-05-Z-6412 came at a high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him from his backside. As a result of which, the Petitioner fell down on the road and sustained grievous head injuries and other injuries all over his body. He was shifted to Government Medical, Raghunathpur and treated as indoor patient for three months as SCB MCH, Cuttack. He also took treatment at Swastik Hospital, Cuttack and Olatpur Government Medical. He has spent Rs.10,00,000/- for his treatment.

14. Learned counsel for the Appellant-Insurance Company, at the outset, contended that the present appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company questioning the determination of the total quantum of compensation. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal has erred in law as well as the fact while assessing the income of the Respondent No.1-Claimant. He further submitted that the Petitioner, aged 47 years, was working as a Mason and his monthly income has been accepted by the

Tribunal as Rs.8,000/-. Such fixation of monthly income was seriously objected to by the learned counsel for the Appellant- Insurance Company. He further contended that the final award is also unsustainable in view of the fact that the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation on different heads, which are legally not permissible. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the Appellant-Insurance Company also elaborated the grounds taken in the appeal memo. He further submitted that the impugned award is unsustainable in law and, accordingly, the same should be set aside.

15. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.1-Claimant, on the other hand, contended that the Tribunal has not committed any illegality in granting the compensation as has been reflected in the impugned judgment. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal, on a very sound basis and after referring to several judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the principles laid down therein, has arrived at the monthly income of the Respondent No.1-Claimant as well as the total compensation amount payable to the Respondent No.1-Claimant. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Respondent No.1- Claimant contended that the appeal filed by the Appellant- Insurance Company is devoid of merit and, accordingly, the same should be dismissed.

16. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for both sides, on a careful examination of the background facts as well as the impugned judgment, this Court is of the prima facie view that the matter can very well be resolved amicably considering the fact that the dispute is only with regard to the quantum of compensation. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the parties were requested to settle the matter in the spirit of the Lok Adalat.

17. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.1-Claimant stated before this Court that the Respondent No.1-Claimant would be satisfied in the event he is paid a total compensation amount of Rs.30,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till realization of the amount.

18. Learned counsel for the Appellant-Insurance Company, on the other hand, left the matter to the discretion of this Court and stated that the Insurance Company shall abide by any amount that would be determined by the Court on the basis of the facts of this case as well as the evidence on record.

19. Taking into consideration the entire factual background of the present case and further on a careful analysis of the impugned award, this Court found that the amount suggested by the learned counsel for the Respondent No.1-Claimant is just, fair and proper.

20. Hence, the Appellant-Insurance Company is directed to pay a total compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees thirty lakhs) along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim application till realization of such amount. Accordingly, the amount awarded in the impugned judgment is modified to the aforesaid extent. Let the modified amount along with interest be deposited before the Tribunal within a period of eight weeks from today. After such deposit, the same shall be disbursed in favour of the Respondent No.1-Claimant in terms of the judgment of the learned Tribunal.

21. On production of a copy of the acknowledgment evidencing deposit of the aforesaid modified amount, the registry shall release the statutory deposit along with accrued interest in favour of the Appellant-Insurance Company on an application being filed by the learned counsel for the Appellant- Insurance Company.

22. Accordingly, the present Appeal stands disposed of subject to aforesaid modification.

( A.K. Mohapatra )

Judge Debasis

Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Designation: SECRETARY Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 09-Sep-2026 21:20:40 Signature Not Verified