IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK MACA No.329 of 2025 M/s. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Cuttack …. Appellant Mr. G.P. Dutta, Advocate -versus- Kalakar Ghadei and Others …. Respondents Mr. D. Pattanayak, Advocate for Res-1 to 3-Company CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 25.07.2025 06. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Company and Mr. D. Pattanayak, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1 to 3- Claimants. 3. This appeal has been filed by the Appellant– Company challenging Judgment dtd.18.09.2024 so passed by the learned 2nd MACT, Cuttack in MAC Case No.377 of 2022. Vide the said Judgment, the Tribunal assessed the compensation at Rs.11,18,000/- along with interest @ 7% per annum payable from the date of filing of the claim application till its realization. 3.1. Learned counsel for the Appellant-Company contended that while assessing the compensation at Rs.11,18,000/-, the Tribunal never take into consideration as to whether the offending vehicle bearing Registration No.OD-05-AH-9322 caused the accident on 13.11.2021 and whether due to the rash and negligent driving of the accused driver, accident occurred, causing death to the deceased. It is contended that even though such a plea was taken before the Tribunal by the Appellant-Company, but the same was never taken into consideration. 3.2. In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellant-company further contended the tribunal while awarding compensation never take into consideration that there is delay in lodging the FIR. It is also contended that the Tribunal committed a wrong by holding the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.12,000/- without having any documentary evidence. It is also contended that the tribunal wrongly held the age of the deceased to be 55 years but as per the Aadhar Card the deceased was 56 years for which multiplier 09 is applicable. It is also contended that the tribunal committed a wrong by awarding Rs.1,50,000/- towards non-pecuniary damages when the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that compensation under conventional head cannot exceed Rs.70,000/-. 3.3. Making all these submissions learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-company contended that had the Tribunal properly appreciated the stand of the Appellant, the compensation amount so awarded would have been on the lower side. It is accordingly contended that the impugned award is not sustainable in the eye of law and requires interference of this Court. 4. Even though Mr. D. Pattanayak, learned counsel appearing for the Claimants-Respondent Nos.1 to 3 though supported the impugned award, but in course of hearing contended that the Claimants-Respondent Nos.1 to 3 will have no grievance, if the compensation amount will be reduced to Rs.8,00,000/-, with interest @ 6% per annum payable from the date of application till its realization. 5. Mr. G.P. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Company left the aforesaid proposition made by the learned counsel for the Claimants-Respondent Nos.1 to 3 to the discretion of this Court. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties, considering the submissions made and in view of the fact that this Court while interfering with the impugned Judgment dtd.18.09.2024 is inclined to reduce the same and held the Claimants-Respondent Nos.1 to 3 entitled to get compensation amount of Rs.8,00,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum payable from the date of filing of the application till its realization. While holding so, this Court directs the Appellant-Company to deposit the aforesaid compensation amount along with interest within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. On such deposit of the amount, learned tribunal shall do well to disburse the amount proportionately in terms of the judgment dated 18.09.2024 in favour of the Claimants-Respondent Nos.1 to 3. 6.1. However, it is observed that if the amount as directed will not be deposited by the Appellant-Company within the aforesaid time period of eight (8) weeks, the compensation amount of Rs.8,00,000/- shall carry interest @ 7% per annum for the period starting from the expiry of the period of eight (8) weeks till it is deposited before the Tribunal. 6.2. It is observed that only after deposit of the amount as directed, appellant will be permitted to take refund of the statutory deposit along with accrued interest if any from the Registry on proper identification. 7. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Basudev