MACA/795/2023 of BRANCH HEAD CUM MANAGER, CHOLAMANDALAM MS G.I.CO. LTD. Vs PRASANTA KUMAR BEHERA on 20 August 2026

ORDER

20.08.2026

Order No.

07.

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

2. MACA No.795 of 2023 is an appeal preferred by the Appellant-Insurance Company challenging the judgment dated 18.04.2023 in MAC No.133 o 2019. Similarly, MACA No.823 of 2023 has been filed at the instance of the Claimants challenging the very same judgment. Since both the judgments arising out of a common accident and a common judgment, both these matters were taken up together for hearing and are disposed of by the following order.

3. The abovenoted two appeals have been filed by the Appellant-Insurance Company as well as the Claimant-Appellant respectively, challenging the judgment dated 18.04.2023 passed in MAC No.133 of 2019 by the learned District Judge -cum-1st MACT, Angul. The learned Tribunal by virtue of the impugned judgment dated 18.04.2023, has awarded a total compensation of Rs.44,76,120/- in favour of the Claimant-Opposite Parties in the MAC case.

4. Both the learned counsel appearing for the Appellant- Insurance Company in MACA Case No.795 of 2023 as well as the Claimant-Appellant in MACA No.823 of 2023, at the outset, submitted before this Court that the respective appeals have been filed challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The appeal preferred by the Appellant-Insurance Company seeks reduction of the quantum of compensation as has been awarded by the Tribunal. On the contrary, the appeal filed by the Claimant-Appellant seeks enhancement of such awarded amount on the ground that such awarded amount is too low considering the income of the deceased.

5. The factual background leading to filing of the abovenoted MAC case, in short, is that on 27.04.2019 at about 10.45 A.M. while the deceased was returning to Angul from village Nimabahali on the National Highway No.55 by a motorcycle along with her husband-claimant No.1, in front of Odyssey motor, the offending vehicle, which is a truck bearing registration No.OD-19-M-5666, came from the backside at a high speed and collided with the motorcycle of the deceased. The offending vehicle was being driven in rash and negligent manner by its driver. As a result of such accident the deceased fell down on the road and sustained injuries. It is also alleged that the deceased suffered an instantaneous death at the spot of occurrence. The deceased was aged about 37 years and was working as an Assistant Teacher at Nimabahali Primary School, drawing a salary of Rs.30,000/- per month.

6. In course of hearing of the abovenoted MAC case, the evidence was led from both sides. The learned Tribunal after a careful appreciation of the evidence led from both sides and on a careful analysis of the submission made by the learned counsels for the respective parties assessed the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.24,034/- as the net salary of the deceased after deducting tax. On such basis, the income of the deceased has been calculated and after applying 15 multiplier in terms of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation reported in AIR (2009)SC

3104,The learned Tribunal has awarded a total compensation amount of Rs.44,76,120/-.

7. While assailing the determination of the quantum of compensation, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant- Insurance Company submitted before this Court that the learned Tribunal has committed gross illegality by taking into consideration the future pay revision which the deceased received after her death while calculating the monthly income of the deceased. On such ground, learned counsel for the Appellant- Insurance Company contended that the monthly income of the deceased has not been correctly assessed and, as such, the total compensation amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is not free from error. Similarly, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent-Claimant, on the other hand, challenged the fixation of the quantum on the ground that the learned Tribunal has failed to grant interest on future prospects. Accordingly, learned counsel for the Appellant-Insurance Company as well as the Respondent- Appellant in both the appeals prayed for setting aside the impugned judgment.

8. In course of hearing, this Court examined the factual background of the present case as well as the judgment of the learned Tribunal. On a careful analysis of the rival contentions as well as the findings arrived at by the learned Tribunal, this Court is of the view that the appeal is confined to determination of the compensation amount only. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that the matter can very will be resolved amicably and the Parties were requested to make an effort accordingly. Learned counsel appearing for the Claimant in the

Claimant’s appeal stated before this Court that the claimant will be satisfied in the event the amount of compensation is reduced to Rs.42,00,000/- (Rupees forty two lakhs) along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of for filing of the claim application on 03.10.1919 till the deposit the amount before the learned Tribunal. Learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Insurance Company, on the other hand, left the fixation of the compensation amount to the discretion is submitted before this Court. In the event this Court modifies suitably the quantum of compensation, by keeping in view the larger interests of the Parties, the same would be acceptable to the Appellant-Insurance Company.

9. Considering the factual background of the present case as well as the impugned judgment, this Court is of the view that in the event the award is modified to Rs.42,00,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application i.e., from 03.10.2019 till deposit of the awarded amount, the same would be just fair and proper. Learned counsel appearing for both sides did not dispute the same.

10. Accordingly, the award in the judgment dated 18.04.2023 is modified to the extent that the awarded amount shall not be Rs.42,00,000./- (Rupees Forty-two lakhs) along with interest @ 6% per annum. The Appellant-Insurance Company is directed to modifies the amount before the Tribunal within eight weeks from the date of communication from a copy of today’s order. It is needless to mention here that the amount shall carry interest @ 6% till the same is deposited before the Tribunal. In the event such amount has already been deposited, the Tribunal shall take into consideration such fact while calculating the interest on the awarded amount. It is further directed that after the amount is deposited, the same shall be disbursed among the legal heirs in accordance with law. It is further directed that on production of a copy of the acknowledgment evidencing deposit the aforesaid amount before the Tribunal, Registry of this Court shall release the statutory amount deposited before this Court along with the accrued interest on the application filed by the counsel for the Appellant-Insurance Company.

11. With the aforesaid modification, both the appeals stand disposed of.

( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra)

Judge Sisir

Digitally Signed Signed by: SISIR KUMAR SETHI Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 21-Aug-2026 19:22:45 Signature Not Verified