Judgment:
A. Pasayat, J.
1. In this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short, the 'Act') quantum awarded by theThird Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Puri (in short, the 'Tribunal') is the subject-matter of challenge.
2. Factual position is almost undisputed, and therefore detailed reference to it is unnecessary.
On 16-3-1988 there was a vehicular accident wherein a mini truck bearing registration No. ADN 7686 was involved. Suresh Chandra Behera (hereinafter referred to as the 'claimant') sustained injuries on account of the accident. He was hospitalised for some time in G.B.S. Hospital, Khurda. On account of the accident he could not continue his job in Khurda Spinning Mill where he was working as a dropper. A claim of Rs. 1,00,000/- was made. Considering the evidence of witnesses and materials on record, the Tribunal awarded Rs. 62,980/-. Since the vehicle was insured with the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'insurer'), the Tribunal directed that the award was to be indemnified by the insurer.
3. In support of the appeal learned counsel for insurer has urged that the conclusions of the Tribunal are presumptuous and are without any basis or reason, and exorbitant award has been made. The learned counsel for claimant on the other hand supported the award stating that the amount awarded was reasonable.
4. There was no definite material before the Tribunal about the loss of earning capacity, if any, and the percentage of physical disability. Certain certificates were filed by the claimant purported to be xerox copies of disability certificate and the certificate granted by the Orthopaedic Specialist. A bare look at them shows that the basis for assessment has not been indicated therein. Added to that the doctor who allegedly treated the claimant was not examined. Therefore, the Tribunal was not justified in making guess work to quantify the award. In normal course I would have remitted the matter back to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication. But considering the fact that the accident took place more than seven years back, I have accepted the suggestion given by learned counsel for claimant to make anoverall assessment of the materials, and to fix the quantum. By taking note of the wages that was being given to the claimant and the period of hospitalisation, the loss of earning capacity is fixed at Rs. 35,000/-, and for physical pain and mental shock the quantum is fixed at Rs. 10,000/- as done by the Tribunal. In the ultimate result, settlement of the claimant is assessed at Rupees 45,000/- on which interest at the rate of 9% from the date of claim is payable. Default rate of interest stipulated by the Tribunal is not maintainable in view of a Division Bench decision of this Court in The Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Haragriva Nayak, 1994 (1) Ori LR 88. Out of total compensation including interest, Rs. 40,000/ - shall be kept in a fixed deposit in a nationalised bank for a period of five years, and no withdrawal shall be permitted against the same within the stipulated period. However, on being moved and being satisfied about pressing necessity, the Tribunal may permit withdrawal of the amount which according to him would meet the requirement.
5. The miscellaneous appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above.