SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Ori) 776

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
B.P.ROUTRAY
Shabana Parveen – Appellant
Versus
Jaysen Hansdah – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :Mr. B.N. Rath, Advocate
For the Respondents:Mr. S. Roy, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

B.P. Routray, J.

1. Present appeal by the claimants is directed against the impugned judgment/award dated 25th June 2024 passed by the Addl. District Magistrate-Cum-Commissioner Employees Compensation, Mayurbhanj, in E.C.Case No.3 of 2020, wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.7,68,560/- has been granted on account of death of the deceased in course of his employment as a driver of car bearing Registration No.JH-O5-AK-4833.

2. Heard Mr. Rath, learned counsel for the Appellants and Mr. Roy, learned counsel for Respondent No.2.

3. The only grievance of the Appellants is that, the Commissioner while granting award did not pay the interest. The claimants being the Appellants have prayed for grant of interest from the date of accident.

4. It is true that grant of award by the Commissioner without interest thereon is grossly erroneous on the face of record. In Ajaya Kumar Das and another vrs. Divisional Manager and another , 2022 SCC OnLine SC 93, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed as follows:

“5. The judgment of the High Court is inexplicable. Having dismissed the appeal of the insurer on the ground of limitation, there was no occasion for the High Court to interfere on merits

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top