FAO/541/2026 of THE LEGAL MANAGER, CLAIMS, M/S. TATA GEN. INS. CO. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR Vs SAROJ MAHANTA on 19 August 2026

ORDER

19.08.2026 I.A. No.762 of 2026

02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3. This application has been filed seeking condonation of delay.

4. Since Mr. Anil Saha, learned counsel contended that he has already entered appearance on behalf of Respondent No.2 while treating notice against Respondent No.2 as sufficient, this Court considering the grounds taken, is inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal and condone the same accordingly.

5. I.A. stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

// 2 //

03. FAO No.541 of 2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Since Mr. A. Saha, learned counsel contended that he has already entered appearance on behalf of Respondent No.2 before the Registry by filing Vakalatnama today, while treating notice against Opp. Party No.2 sufficient, the matter was heard in presence of the learned counsel for the Appellant and Claimants-Respondents as well as Respondent No.2.

3. This appeal has been filed inter alia challenging the award passed by the learned Commissioner for Employees Compensation-cum-Joint Labour Commissioner, Cuttack in E.C. Case No.EC/00348/202/CUTT. Vide judgment dtd.31.10.2025, learned Commissioner held the Claimants- Respondents entitled to get compensation amount of Rs.18,51,8200/- along with interest @ 12% per annum payable from the date of accident till its payment within a period of 30(thirty) days from the date of order, failing which appellant will be liable to pay 50% penalty along with interest.

4. In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the Appellant contended that learned Commissioner while assessing the compensation, never take into account the stand taken by the Appellant that the accident took place near Udaypur and the injured resides at Keonjhar and no document has been produced by the injured that he is the resident of Cuttack. In view of such stand, the claim should not have been entertained.

// 3 //

4.1. It is also contended that learned Commissioner in absence of any documentary proof, held the loss of earning capacity of the injured to be 100%. Learned Tribunal also committed wrong in awarding interest @ 12% on the compensation amount from the date of accident along with penalty at 50%.

4.2. It is also contended that learned Commissioner while assessing the compensation, should not have taken into account the evidence of P.W.2, as the injured was not treated by him and all his prescriptions have been manufactured. It is also contended that no FIR has been lodged in any Police Station, which clearly establish that the claimant in connivance with Respondent No.2 raised a false claim.

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

5. Mr. D. Patnaik, learned counsel for the Claimant- Respondent No.1 on the other hand though supported the impugned award, but in course of hearing contended that the Claimant-Respondent No.1 will be fully satisfied if this Court allows compensation amount of Rs.13,50,000/- consolidated.

6. Learned counsel for the Appellant to the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the Respondent No.2-claimant leave the same to the discretion of this Court.

// 4 //

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submissions made, this Court while is interfering with the impugned judgment dtd.31.10.2025 so passed in E.C. Case No. EC/00348/202/CUTT, held the Claimant-Respondent No.1 entitled to get compensation of Rs.13,50,000/- consolidated along with accrued interest if any on such compensation amount of Rs.13,50,000/-.

7.1. Since the entire amount has been deposited by the Appellant before the learned Commissioner, this Court directs learned Commissioner to disburse a sum of Rs.13,50,000/- along with accrued interest if any, on such amount of Rs.13,50,000/- in favour of the Claimant- Respondent No.1, within a period of 4 (four) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Residue amount along with accrued interest, if any, be disbursed in favour of the appellant, within the aforesaid time period also.

8. The appeal accordingly stands disposed of.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

Basudev

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASUDEV SWAIN Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 21-Aug-2026 16:17:31 Signature Not Verified