N.I.CO.LTD vs MADHURI MANJARI SING

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.958 of 2010
CNR No. ODHC010012672010

(In the matter of application under Section 173(1) of
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988).
National Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Cuttack
Appellant
…
-versus-
Madhuri Manjari Sing Deo &
others
… Respondents


For Appellant : Mr. P. Panda, Advocate on
behalf of Mr. S.K. Padhi,
Advocate

For Respondents : None

CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY




DATE OF HEARING & JUDGMENT : 02.11.2026 (ORAL)

G. Satapathy, J.


1. This is an Appeal U/S. 173 of Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988 (in short, “the Act”) by the appellant-National
Insurance Co. Ltd., Cuttack (in short, “the insurer”)
assailing the impugned judgment dated 26.08.2010
rd
passed by learned 3 Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Rourkela (In short “the Tribunal”) in M.A.C. Case
Nos.426 and 425 of 2003 directing the insurer to pay a
sum of Rs.1,96,500/- together with Simple Interest (SI)
@ 7% per annum w.e.f. the date of filing of the claim
application to the claimants-Respondents(now only to
MACA No.958 of 2010 Page 1 of 5

surviving R-1 & 2) as compensation towards death of
one Bhawani Pratap Singh Deo (in short
“the
deceased”), whose LRs then are the surviving R-1&2 and
Deceased R-3, in a motor vehicular accident.
2. The precise facts giving rise to the Claim by R-
1 to 3 are that in an accident which took place on
02.01.2002 at about 3.00PM San Nuagaon, one Tractor
bearing Regd. No. OR-14G-0427
(in short, “the
offending vehicle”) carrying the deceased capsized
resulting in death of the deceased. An FIR being filed on
this accident came to be registered at B.Tarang P.S.
Case No. 03 of 2002 which culminated in submission of
charge sheet against the driver for rash and negligent
driving of the offending vehicle. Upon a claim being filed
by the dependents of the deceased, the same was
registered in MAC Case Nos. 425 of 2003 and 426 of
2003 and the learned Tribunal proceeded therewith by
issuing notice to the owner and insurer of the offending
vehicle and accordingly, the claim by R1to3 was
disposed of by granting compensation to the claimants
for an amount indicated supra .
MACA No.958 of 2010 Page 2 of 5

3. Heard, Mr. Mr. Piyush Panda, learned Advocate
appearing on behalf of Mr. Saurjya Kanta Padhi, learned
Advocate for the appellant-Insurance Company, but
none appears for R-1 & 2 despite duly noticed, however,
R-3 died and having not substituted, the appeal against
R-3 stands abated.
4. After having considered the submission as
advanced for the appellant, it appears that the challenge
as to the impugned judgment in this Appeal is to its
quantum and the liability to satisfy the award, but a
careful perusal and scrutiny of the impugned judgment
together with the evidence, it goes without saying that
the claimants have established by producing evidence
that the deceased died due to rash and negligent driving
of the driver of the offending vehicle and thereby, the
claim by the claimants is squarely maintainable, but
coming to the issue of quantum of compensation, it
appears that the learned Tribunal has considered the
deceased to have been earning his livelihood by way of
cultivation and it has accordingly taken the monthly
income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- which in the
MACA No.958 of 2010 Page 3 of 5

circumstance does not appear to be exorbitant. It is also
not disputed that the age of the parents of the deceased
was 56 & 59 years, but the compensation has been
computed by taking multiplier of 12, however, the
claimants have not challenged the quantum of
compensation. On a careful scrutiny of the quantum of
compensation as assessed by the learned Tribunal, it
does not suffer from any illegality, nevertheless the
same has been assessed by adopting a different method.
Further, there is no challenge to the quantum of
compensation by the claimants and therefore, it would
not proper to disturb the quantum at the long lapse of
time of around 23 years of filing of the claim.
5. On coming back to the next issue of liability to
pay the compensation, it appears that the impugned
judgment clearly discloses the vehicle was duly insured
with the appellant and the driver was having valid DL
and thereby, there is no infirmity in the impugned
judgment directing the Insurer to pay the compensation.
In the aforesaid facts and situation and on consideration
of materials placed on record, this Court does not find
MACA No.958 of 2010 Page 4 of 5

any illegality in the impugned judgment so as to warrant
interference by this Court in this Appeal.
6. In the result, the Appeal stands dismissed, but
without any costs. Consequently, the impugned
judgment passed by the learned Tribunal is, hereby,
confirmed and the appellant-Insurer is directed to pay
Rs.1,96,500/- together with simple interest @ 7% per
annum w.e.f. the date of filing of the claim application
till its realization to the surviving claimants towards
compensation within 08 weeks hence and on such
deposit; the compensation amount shall be disbursed to
the claimants in terms of the award by apportioning the
share of deceased R-3 equally to R-1&2. The statutory
deposit together with the accrued interest thereon be
refunded back to the insurer upon production of proof of
deposit of the compensation amount before the Tribunal.



(G. Satapathy)
Judge

Orissa High Court, Cuttack,
nd
Dated the 2 day of November, 2026/S.Sasmal
MACA No.958 of 2010 Page 5 of 5