Bombay High Court
Ramesh Prabhakar Adhav And Anr vs Sarswatibai Shankarrao Nikam And ... on 18 March, 2016
Bench: V.K. Jadhav
1 FA 1093.2002.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
...
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1093 OF 2002
...
1. Ramesh Prabhakar Adhav,
age Major, Occ. Tempo owner,
R/o Jeur Baijabaiche, Taluka
Nagar, District Ahmednagar.
2. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
having its head and registered
office at New India Assurance
Building, 87, M.G. Marg, Fort,
Mumbai and having Divisional
Office at Ahmednagar and
at Aurangabad. ..Appellants..
VERSUS
1. Smt. Saraswatibai Shankarrao Nikam,
age 47 years, Occ. Agril.
2. Dhananjaya Shankarrao Nikam,
age 21 yrs, Occ Student.
3. Sandeep Shankarrao Nikam,
age 19 years, Occ. Student.
4. Ujwala Shankarrao Nikam,
age 23 years, Occ. Student.
5. Madhav Bhau Nikam.
6. Shivbai Madhav Nikam.
Resp No.5,6 both are shown
as dead. ..Respondents..
All R/o of Katrad, Taluka Rahuri,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
::: Uploaded on - 22/03/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 09:30:16 :::
2 FA 1093.2002.odt
7. Baliram Maruti Todamal,
age major, Occ. Driver,
R/o Todawal Wadi, Post Jeur
Taluka Nagar, Dist. Ahmednagar. ..Respondents..
...
Advocate for Appellants : Shri D S Kulkarni h/f S.L.
Kulkarni
Advocate for Respondents 1-4 : Mr N C Garud
...
CORAM : V.K. JADHAV, J.
Dated: March 18, 2016
...
ORAL JUDGMENT :-
1.
Being aggrieved by the Judgment and Award
passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Ahmednagar dated 1.7.1999 in M.A.C.P.
No.531 of 1992, the owner and insurer preferred this
appeal.
2. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal. are as
under :-
The accident had taken place on 28.5.1992 at
about 17.30 hours at Ahmednagar-Manmad road within
the limits of village Rahuri. At the relevant time,
deceased Shankarrao Nikam was driving the motorcycle
and on the way, one tempo came from back side and
gave dash to his motor cycle, in consequence of which,
3 FA 1093.2002.odt
deceased Shankarrao Nikam died on the spot. The
Respondents-original claimants preferred M.A.C.P. 531
of 1992 for claiming compensation against the
Respondents owner and insurer of the vehicle involved
in the accident. The learned Member of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmednagar, by its impugned
Judgment and order dated 1.7.1999 partly allowed the
petition and thereby directed the present appellants to
pay an amount of Rs.4,14,000/- inclusive of 'No Fault
Liability' to the respondents-claimants alongwith
interest from the date of application till the realization.
Being aggrieved by the same, the owner of the vehicle
involved in the accident and the insurer preferred this
appeal jointly to the extent of quantum of compensation,
most particularly to the extent of Rs.1.00 lac in excess
stated to have been awarded by the Tribunal.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits
that, the learned Member of the Tribunal has awarded
excessive compensation to the extent of Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rs one lac). The same is without any base. The
learned counsel submits that, the appeal may be
4 FA 1093.2002.odt
allowed to that extent.
4. Learned counsel for respondents/claimants
submits that, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the
compensation and awarded just and reasonable
compensation to the respondents/original claimants.
Hence, the appeal be dismissed.
5.
Following points arises for my determination and I
have recorded my findings to those points for the
reasons given below :-
S.No. POINTS FINDINGS
1 Whether the Tribunal has rightly
Yes.
assessed the compensation ?
2 Whether the impugned Judgment
No.
and Award calls for any
interference ?
3 What order ? As per final order.
REASONS
6. Deceased Shankarrao was doing the business of
manufacturing brick and also dealt with transport
business. He was also cultivating his agricultural land.
5 FA 1093.2002.odt
It appears that, the Tribunal has rightly considered the
supervisory and Managerial skill of the deceased
Shankarrao and accordingly assessed his monthly
income at Rs.4,000/-. After deducting the amount
towards his personal expenses, the annual dependency
is considered at Rs.3,000/- p.m. corresponding to Rs.
(3,000 x 12) = Rs.36,000/- per year. Considering the
age of the deceased Shankarrao at the time of his
accidental death, the Tribunal has rightly applied the
multiplier '11'. Thus, after considering the dependency
and after awarding the compensation under the non-
pecuniary heads such as loss of estate and consortium
Rs.15,000/-, for funeral Rs.3,000/-, the total amount of
compensation awarded is Rs.4,14,000/-. I do not find
any fault in the impugned judgment and order. No
interference is called for. There is no merit in the
appeal. I accordingly answer the points and proceed to
pass the following order.
O R D E R
I. The appeal is hereby dismissed.
6 FA 1093.2002.odt
II. In the circumstances, there shall be no
order as to costs.
III. In response to the order passed by this
Court, the appellants have deposited the
entire amount under the Award before this
Court. The Respondents-claimants are
entitled to withdraw the same alongwith
accrued interest.
IV.
Award be drawn up accordingly.
V. First Appeal is disposed of.
sd/-
( V.K. JADHAV, J. )
...
aaa/-
