The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK MACA NO.386 of 2024 (In the matter of application under Section 173(1) of the M.V. Act, 1988). The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Bhubaneswar -versus- … Appellant Parbati Sahoo and others … Respondents For Appellant : Mr. G.P. Dutta, Advocate For Respondents
Legal Reasoning
come up before this Court in an appeal U/S. 173 of the MV Act challenging it on various grounds, but in the course of hearing of the appeal, the appellant-insurer only confines its challenge with regard to the amount awarded under the heading of “loss of consortium”. 4. In the course of hearing of the appeal, Mr.G.P.Dutta, learned counsel for the appellant very fairly and vehemently argues by relying upon the judgment of Apex Court in Shri Ram General Insurance Company Limited vrs. Bhagat Singh Rawat and others; Civil Appeal NOS. 2410- 2412/2023 [SLP(c) Nos. 11669-11671 of 2020] disposed of on 27.03.2023, submits that by no stretch of imagination, the total consortium amount can exceed Rs.40,000/- as held by the Apex Court in the aforesaid MACA No.386 of 2024 Page 3 of 7 decision, to which Mr.Pradeep Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 6 does not dispute and he unequivocally submits that there is no quarrel over the position of law as settled by the Apex Court and he has got no objection with regard to reducing the award in terms of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in Shri Ram General Insurance Company Limited(supra). 5. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears no dispute that the learned Tribunal has passed the judgment in the motor accident claim case awarding compensation to the claimants for a sum of Rs.10,03,000/- which includes Rs.2,20,000/- under the heading of loss of consortium, but the law has been well settled by the Apex Court in the decision Shri Ram General Insurance Company Limited(supra) as relied on by learned counsel for the appellant wherein the Apex Court has held the total amount payable under the head of “loss of consortium” to be MACA No.386 of 2024 Page 4 of 7 Rs.40,000/- by quoting the paragraph-61(viii) of the judgment in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vrs. Pranay Sethi and others; (2017) 16 SCC 680 with approval which reads as under:- “61(viii) Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs.15,000/- Rs.40,000/- and respectively. The aforesaid Rs.15,000/- amounts should be enhanced at the rate of 10% in every three years.” 6. Further, the appellant has also challenged the award on various ground, but on a careful scrutiny of the judgment of the learned Tribunal, this Court does not find any error apparent on the findings of the learned Tribunal with respect to challenge of the appellant on other grounds, but the appellant has got a valid challenge with regard to award of amount under the heading “loss of consortium” since the Apex Court in Pranay Sethi(supra) has already held that the compensation amount under conventional heads namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs.15,000/-, Rs.40,000/- and MACA No.386 of 2024 Page 5 of 7 Rs.15,000/- respectively. Thus, the appeal needs to be allowed to this extent, subject to maximum amount of compensation of Rs.84,000/- under conventional heads (Rs.70,000/-+Rs.14,000/- @10% in every three years for six years in view of the judgment Pranay Sethi(supra). Accordingly, the award needs to be modified and the claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.8,33,700/-(Rs.7,49,700+ Rs.84,000) together with simple interest @ 6% per annum w.e.f. 12.08.2010 as compensation which should be paid to the claimant- respondents proportionately in terms of the award made by the learned Tribunal. 7. In the result, the appeal stands allowed in part to the extent indicated above, but no order as to costs. It is, however, made clear that the right of recovery to the appellant-insurer as granted by the learned Tribunal is hereby confirmed. Further, the unutilized cheque towards statutory deposit be returned back to the appellant-insurer on production of proof of deposit of amount before the Tribunal. On deposit of MACA No.386 of 2024 Page 6 of 7 the awarded amount before the Tribunal, the same shall be disbursed proportionately to the claimants in terms of the award. (G. Satapathy) Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack, Dated the 22nd day of October, 2024/Kishore Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: KISHORE KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 28-Oct-2024 10:11:53 MACA No.386 of 2024 Page 7 of 7
Arguments
: Mr. P.K. Mishra, Advocate (Respondent Nos.1 to 6) CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY F DATE OF HEARING &JUDGMENT:22.10.2024(ORAL) G. Satapathy, J. 1. This is an statutory appeal U/S. 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (in short, “M.V.Act”) by the appellant-insurer challenging the award dated 06.12.2023 passed by the learned 3rd Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Puri in MACT Case No. 270 of 2010 which has been filed U/S. 166 of MV Act, directing the appellant-insurer to pay a sum of Rs.10,03,000/- MACA No.386 of 2024 Page 1 of 7 together with 6% interest as a compensation to the claimant-respondents with right of recovery from the respondent-owner. While awarding the compensation amount, the learned Tribunal has also made the apportionment of the compensation amount amongst the claimants. 2. The facts in precise are that the predecessor-in-interest of claimant-respondents having been died in a vehicular accident on 14.09.2009, the respondent-claimants filed an application U/S. 166 of the MV Act before the learned Tribunal claiming compensation for the loss of their bread earner on the ground of rash and negligent riding of the rider of offending Bajaj Pulsar Motor Cycle OR-13C-1029, which eventually caused the death of the deceased. Accordingly, the learned Tribunal after going through the averments and pleading of the parties framed necessary issues and adjudicated the claim of the claimant-respondents and finally came up with the order impugned in this appeal. By the aforesaid order, MACA No.386 of 2024 Page 2 of 7 the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation to the claimant-respondents for the amount as indicated supra and granted the appellant-insurer the recovery of right. 3. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid order granting compensation to the claimants, the insurer has