Bombay High Court
Universal Sompo General Ins. Co. ... vs Smt. Pratibha Wd/O Ramesh Pote And ... on 12 August, 2021
Bench: S. M. Modak
12fa1267.2018. 1/3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CIVIL APPLICATION (CAF) NO. 1409/2021 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1267/2018
Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd., Versus Smt. Pratibha wd/o Ramesh Pote and others
*******************************************************************************************************************
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.
*******************************************************************************************************************
Shri F.I. Khan, Advocate for appellant.
Shri P.R. Agrawal, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
CORAM : S.M. MODAK, J.
DATE : 12/08/2021
1] The notice on respondent Nos. 5 and 7 could not be
served due to change of residence. The appellant knows the
address before the Tribunal as their last known address. Hence,
notice be served on them by paper publication by respondent
Nos. 5 and 7.
2] Application is disposed of.
Civil Application (CAF) No. 1104/2021
1] Heard learned Advocate for the appellant and learned
Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 4/original claimants.
2] Already this Court has permitted these respondents to
withdraw 25% of the deposited amount as per the order dated
30/07/2019. The main reason for withdrawal contended at that
time was old age of respondent No.4, who is mother of the
deceased. Now, the respondents says that they are in need of
::: Uploaded on - 12/08/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 13/08/2021 07:15:15 :::
12fa1267.2018. 2/3
money for incurring the education expenses of respondent Nos. 2
and 3. The prayer is opposed on behalf of the Insurance
Company. They prayed that matter can be heard finally after
notice is served on respondent Nos. 5 and 7 by Paper Publication.
3] The deceased was a teacher, the tribunal while
quantifying the compensation has not applied the multiplier and
instead of that has considered remaining service of the deceased.
So according to respondents if the multiplier is applied the
amount of compensation will be more. As against this learned
advocate for the appellant submitted that they have also taken
the ground of contributory negligence and other grounds.
4] As per the order dated 15/10/2018, this Court
directed the Insurance Company to deposit entire amount of
compensation. However, while staying the execution of the
impugned judgment, Court directed the appellant to deposit the
principal amount. In view of that the amount of Rs. 59,49,846/-
is deposited. Learned Advocate for the appellant admits that the
amount of interest is not deposited and accordingly to respondent
it may come to more than Rupees 20 Lakhs.
5] I find the reasons mentioned in the application as
genuine. Even though the respondents might have received the
benefits from the employer of the deceased, i.e. a different issue
and the respondents are certainly entitled to ask for withdrawal
of the amount. So, I am inclined to allow the prayer. Even if the
appellant may succeed in the appeal, still they are not deposited
::: Uploaded on - 12/08/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 13/08/2021 07:15:15 :::
12fa1267.2018. 3/3
the interest amount. So application deserved to be allowed.
Hence, the order :
ORDER
A] Nazar is directed to transfer the remaining
amount from Rs. 59,49,846/- [after considering
the earlier withdrawal of 25%] along with the
accrued interest in the bank account of
respondent No.1.
B] The respondent No. 1 is directed to give an
usual undertaking and respondent No.1 to
utilize that amount for educational expenses of
respondent Nos. 2 and 3 as they are minor.
First Appeal No. 1267/2018
1] Appellant to file private paper-book within two
months.
2] List the matter on 05/10/2021.
JUDGE
rkn
