Page 1 of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK MACA No.1045 of 2024 The Divisional Manager, M/s. National Insurance Company Ltd., Cuttack ..... Appellant Ms. S. Das, Advocate -versus- Tilattama Behera & Ors. ..... Respondents Mr. P.K. Behera, Advocate (Respondent Nos. 1 to 3) Mr. G. Madani, Advocate (Respondent No. 4) CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 25.06.2025 Order No. 05 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Ms. S. Das, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant, Mr. P.K. Behera, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Mr. G. Madani, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 4. 3. The present appeal has been filed inter alia challenging order dtd.22.01.2024 so passed by the learned District Judge-cum-1st MACT, Bhadrak in MAC Case No. 131 of 2021. Vide the said Judgment the Tribunal allowed the claim of the Claimants- Respondents by allowing compensation to the tune of Rs.14,61,256/- along with interest @ 7% per annum payable from the date of filing of the claim application. 4. Learned counsel for the Appellant while assailing the judgment, contended that since the policy in question is an Act only policy, which is not disputed, the liability saddled on the Appellant needs Page 2 of 2. interference of this Court and the Appellant is not liable to pay the amount as directed. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 as well as Respondent No. 4 also does not dispute the contention raised by the learned counsel for the Appellant regarding issuance of the policy as an act only policy. It is however contended that since the issue with regard to liability of the Insurer, where a policy has been issued in the name and style act only policy is pending before the Apex Court, the matter be kept pending till a decision is taken by the Apex Court. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, it is the view of this Court that unless and until the issue regarding liability of an insurer in a case of Act only policy pending before the Apex Court is decided, the Appellant cannot be held liable to pay the amount as directed. 6.1. Therefore, for the present this Court is inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment. While interfering with the judgment, this Court quash the award, however, with the liberty that the Claimants- Respondents will reiterate with the claim, if the issue goes in their favour before the Apex Court. 7. The Appellant-Company be permitted to take back the statutory deposit along with accrued interest if any from the Registry on proper identification. 8. With the aforesaid liberty and direction, the appeal stands disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Sneha