United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Bhaskar Gopinath Barhate & Anr
2018 Latest Caselaw 1054 Bom

                                          (1)                   204-FA 504 of 2002



        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                204 FIRST APPEAL NO. 504 OF 2002
     WITH CA/3403/2002 IN FA/504/2002 WITH CA/7261/2002 IN
                           FA/504/2002

1.     United India Insurance Co.Ltd.,
       Ahmednagar, At. & Dist.Ahmednagar
       Through its Divisional Manager,
       authorized representative and signatory,
       Ahmednagar Division, Kisan Kranti
       Building, Ahmednagar, Dist.Ahmednagar.

                                 VERSUS

1.     Bhaskar Gopinath Barhate
       Age: 37 years, Occu.: Service,
       R/o.Rajeshwar Housing Society,
       Hodshil Sir Bugalow,
       Rahuri Khuda, Tal.Rahuri,
       District-Ahmednagar.

2.      Subhash G.Kotasthane
        Age: Major, Occu.: -
        R/o.10/85, Meghali Society Ltd.,
        Domale Path, Erandavane, Pune 4.
                                 
                               ...
              Advocate for Appellant : Mr.A.B.Gatne
         Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Mr.S.B.Gorde Patil 
                                        (absent)
     Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr.L.B.Pallod (absent)
                               ...
                                 
                               CORAM :  M.S.SONAK, J.

DATE : 29.1.2018

(2) 204-FA 504 of 2002

ORAL JUDGMENT:-

1) Heard Mr.A.B.Gatne learned counsel for the

appellant.

2) The challenge in this appeal is to the Judgment and

award dated 25.2.2002 by which the Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal, Ahmednagar, has awarded the respondents

compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- together with interest @ 9%

p.a. from the date of application until satisfaction of

the entire claim.

3) Mr.Gatne submits that in this case the disability is

reported to be only 13%. He submits that there is

evidence on record that all medical expenses were already

reimbursed to the respondent/claimant by his employer.

He points out that in these circumstances, the entire

claimed amount i.e. Rs.2,00,000/- by way of compensation

is grossly excessive and un-sustainble. Mr.Gatne points

out that Doctor who actually treated the claimant has

(3) 204-FA 504 of 2002

never examined and some other Doctor was examined, who

has issued issued the disability certificate.

4) The respondents though served neither present nor

represented.

5) The material on record does indicate that all the

medical expenses were reimbursed to the claimants and

therefore, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has not

made any award in respect of the same. The medical

certificate produced on record also indicates 13%

permanent disability. There is evidence on record to the

effect that the respondent/claimant had to undergo two

operations as he sustained fractures to his right leg.

He has deposed that he had hired a private motor vehicle

to attend Sancheti Hospital. He has to take special diet

while in the hospital. There is also evidence that

certain implants had been placed in or order to met the

fractures, but the claimant has not turned up for further

(4) 204-FA 504 of 2002

surgery to remove the implants.

6) Upon perusal of the entire evidence on record, it

does appear that the compensation awarded by the Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal is on higher side. On the facts

and circumstances of the present case, considering the

nature of injury as well as the pain and suffering, which

claimants must have gone through on account of accident,

an amount of Rs.50,000/- could have been awarded under

this head. Towards disability of 13% and the

inconvenience occurred to the claimant, who has stated to

be a Research Officer, compensation of further

Rs.50,000/- could have been awarded. It takes total

compensation to Rs.1,00,000/-

7) Even upon taking a liberal view of the matter and

awarding the compensation towards hiring of private

vehicle, attendant charges, special diet and such other

matters, the compensation of Rs.50,000/- could have been

(5) 204-FA 504 of 2002

awarded to the respondent/claimant. It takes total

compensation amount to Rs.1,50,000/-, which will be the

maximum that could have been awarded to the

respondent/claimant.

8) The impugned award to the extent of awarding

compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- is therefore, liable to be

interfered with and the compensation amount to be reduced

to Rs.1,50,000/-. Accordingly, the impugned award is

modified and compensation is reduced from Rs.2,00,000/-

to Rs.1,50,000/-.

9) The respondent/claimant has already withdrawn the

compensation amount of Rs.2,00,000/- by furnishing

solvent security. Apart from this, the respondent/

claimant has already withdrawn Rs.25,000/- towards no

fault liability. Therefore, the respondent/claimant is

directed to deposit in this Court, within a period of

eight weeks from today, a sum of Rs.75,000/- together

(6) 204-FA 504 of 2002

with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date such amount was

withdrawn till the date of deposit. If this is not done,

the appellant shall entitle to execute this order.

10) It is clarified that in case any interest amount is

due and payable to the respondent/claimant, then the same

shall be calculated @ 9% p.a. on now modified amount of

Rs.1,50,000/-. The respondent/claimant make adjustments

in so far as this amount is concerned.

11) The appeal is partly allowed in the aforesaid terms.

12) As the appeal is disposed of, pending civil

applications do not survive and are disposed of.

13) There shall be no order as to costs.

[M.S.SONAK, J.] SPT/204-FA 504 of 2002