Odisha High CourtCivil LawCivil Procedure and Evidence

Injured Van Passenger’s ₹50,000 Compensation Unchanged; Orissa HC Grants 6% Interest From Claim Filing Until Payment

BABITA SAHUv.BHAGIRATHI SAHOO

Injured Van Passenger’s ₹50,000 Compensation Unchanged; Orissa HC Grants 6% Interest From Claim Filing Until Payment. BABITA SAHU vs BHAGIRATHI SAHOO. Odisha High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

1. Whether the 115-day delay in filing the appeal should be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963

The court held

The Court condoned the 115-day delay and disposed of the appeal by modifying the interest direction.

It also directed

The compensation award of Rs. 50,000 was otherwise confirmed, with interest at 6% per annum payable from the date of filing of the claim application until realization.

The insurer was directed to deposit the amount before the Tribunal within eight weeks for disbursement to the appellant

01Facts

On 26 June 1989, the appellant was injured when a Maruti van in which she was travelling capsized near Motanga.

pp. 1–3, 5–6

She was treated as an inpatient at SCBMCH, Cuttack, including a later admission for removal of implants.

pp. 1–3, 5–6

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded her Rs. 50,000, with interest at 6% per annum only from three years before the date of judgment until payment.

pp. 1–3, 5–6

The appellant appealed, seeking enhanced compensation and interest from the date of filing the claim; the appeal was filed 115 days late

pp. 1–3, 5–6

02Issues

i.1. Whether the 115-day delay in filing the appeal should be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963

pp. 1, 4–5

ii.2. Whether the compensation should be enhanced on the evidence of injury and alleged permanent disability, and whether the interest award should be modified

pp. 5–7

03Law Applied

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 permits a delayed appeal to be admitted where sufficient cause is shown; the Court stated that a shorter delay should be approached liberally and that substantial justice should generally prevail over technical considerations

pp. 4–5

Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for an appeal against a Claims Tribunal’s award

p. 1

The judgment cites no specific precedent or statutory provision governing the rate or commencement of interest; it assessed the Tribunal’s interest direction on the circumstances of the case

pp. 6–7

Provisions in the judgment · 2 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173

Limitation Act, 1963 Section 5

04Reasoning

The Court condoned the delay, noting that the appellant was a claimant, the insurer had filed no written objection, and the delay had been sufficiently explained.

pp. 4–5

On compensation, the appellant had produced only a photocopy of the disability certificate, had not explained the absence of the original discharge certificate, and had not produced the disability certificate before the High Court.

pp. 5–6

Nor was there valid supporting evidence for the claimed medical expenses.

pp. 5–6

Given the injuries, treatment and amounts already awarded for treatment, pain and suffering, and loss of amenities, the Court found no evidentiary basis to increase the Rs. 50,000 award.

pp. 5–6

It nevertheless held that the Tribunal had erred in limiting interest to the period beginning three years before judgment and substituted interest from the date the claim application was filed.

pp. 6–7

05Holding

The Court condoned the 115-day delay and disposed of the appeal by modifying the interest direction.

p. 5, 7

The compensation award of Rs. 50,000 was otherwise confirmed, with interest at 6% per annum payable from the date of filing of the claim application until realization.

p. 5, 7

The insurer was directed to deposit the amount before the Tribunal within eight weeks for disbursement to the appellant

p. 5, 7
Odisha High Court

Original Court PDF

BABITA SAHUvsBHAGIRATHI SAHOO

Odisha High Court · November 09, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment