Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK MACA No.443 of 2023 M/s. Cholamandalam MS G.I. Co. Ltd. ..... Appellant Mr. A.A. Khan, Advocate -versus- Mamata Rajbhar & Anr. ..... Respondents Mr. B.B. Singh, Advocate (Respondent Nos. 1 & 2) CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 28.03.2025 Order No.09 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. A.A. Khan, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Company and Mr. B.B. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the Claimant-Respondent Nos. 1 & 2. 3. The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant-Company challenging Judgment dtd.17.12.2022 so passed by the learned MACT-I, Balasore in MAC Case No. 109/2019. Vide the said judgment the Tribunal awarded compensation amount of Rs.15,00,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum payable from the date of filing of the claim application. 4. In support of the appeal, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Company contended that while assessing the compensation, the Tribunal did not take into consideration the fact that Claimants cannot claim any compensation by filing the application under Sec. 165(1) of the M.V. Act before the Tribunal, Page 2 of 3. as the deceased was the Owner-cum-Driver of the offending vehicle and he was not a 3rd Party. 4.1. It is further contended that since Claimants-Respondents instead of approaching the Appellant-Company for release of the compensation amount under Personal Accident Benefit in terms of the policy, approached the Tribunal by filing the application under Sec. 166 of the M.V. Act, the claim application should not have been entertained. It is also contended that Claimants are not eligible and entitled to get any interest on the awarded compensation amount of Rs.15,00,000/- as the Claimants instead of approaching the Appellant to release the Personal Accident Benefit so fixed at Rs.15,00,000/- moved the application under Sec. 166 of the M.V. Act. 5. Mr. B.B. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the Claimants- Respondents though supported the impugned award, but contended that in view of the amount fixed under such Personal Accident benefit at Rs.15,00,000/-, the Claimants-Respondents will have no grievance if the award is confined to the coverage under Personal Accident benefit at Rs.15,00,000/-. 6. Mr. A.A. Khan, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant- Company left the aforesaid proposition made by the learned counsel for the Claimant-Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 to the discretion of this Court. 7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court while interfering with the impugned Judgment dtd.17.12.2022, held the Claimants- Page 3 of 3. Respondents entitled to get compensation amount of Rs.15,00,000/- consolidated. This Court accordingly while holding so, directs the Appellant-Company to deposit the awarded amount of Rs.15,00,000/- within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. On such deposit of the amount, the Tribunal shall disburse the same in favour of the Claimants-Respondents proportionately in terms of the Judgment passed on 17.12.2022. 7.1. 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.15,00,000/- shall carry interest @ 6% per annum for the period starting from the expiry of the period of eight (8) weeks till its payment. However, it is observed that this order will not be followed in other cases. 7.2. On such deposit of the amount, the Appellant-Company shall be permitted to take back the statutory deposit along with accrued interest if any from the Registry on proper identification. 8. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Sneha