The New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Sonali Alias Ketaki Kishor ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 17076 Bom

                                                                          24-FA.761.13.odt


               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                            FIRST APPEAL NO.761 OF 2013

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.                                 ..Appellants

                Vs.

1.      Sonali alias Ketaki Kishor Kakade
2.      Usha Kisan Kakade
3.      Balasaheb Laxman Tekude
4.      Shaila Kailash Tekude                                    ..Respondents

                                 ----
Mr.A.B.Gatne, Advocate for appellants
Mr.R.A.Tambe, Advocate for respondent no.1
Mr.R.L.Kute, Advocate for respondent nos.3 and 4
                                 ----

                                    CORAM : R.G. AVACHAT, J.

DATE : DECEMBER 08, 2021 ORDER :-

This is an insurance company's appeal taking exception to

the quantum of compensation of Rs.7,50,000/- awarded by the Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal, Sangamner in Motor Accident Claim Petition

No.109 of 2006, on account of death in vehicular accident. The

challenge is only to the quantum of compensation.

2. Heard.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant - insurance company

would submit that the deceased - Kishor was an agriculturist. The

2 24-FA.761.13

Tribunal considered his agricultural income twice for grant of

compensation, that is to say, his agricultural income was

considered notionally at Rs.3,000/- per month besides a sum of

Rs.2,000/- per month on account of loss of agricultural supervision

charges. According to learned counsel, on demise of Kishor, the

land has been inherited by the claimants and as such, it is not the

case of loss of agricultural income. He, therefore, urged for scaling

down the amount of compensation.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents/claimants would, on

the other hand, support the impugned judgment and award.

According to him, the respondents/claimants are, in fact, entitled for

enhanced compensation in view of the Apex Court judgments in the

cases of (i) National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi

and ors., (2017)16 SCC 680; and (ii) Magma General Insurance

Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and ors., (2018)18

SCC 130.

5. Considered the rival submissions. Perused the impugned

judgment and award. In paragraph 11 of the impugned judgment,

the Tribunal has considered Rs.3,000/- per month as notional

income of the deceased from agriculture. The Tribunal has

3 24-FA.761.13

additionally considered Rs.2,000/- per month towards the loss of

agricultural supervisory charges. In view of this Court, the same

may not be permissible. On demise of Kishor, the land remained for

cultivation by his legal representatives/claimants i.e. mother and

minor child. His widow is stated to have remarried and given up her

claim. Due to demise of Kishor, in fact, what the claimants have

suffered is, the loss that the deceased was supervising the

agriculture and now they are required to engage someone to do the

same.

6. The Tribunal did not grant any compensation on account

of future prospects. A very meagre amount was awarded under

conventional heads. Even if the contention of learned counsel for

the appellant-insurance company is accepted as it is, the quantum of

compensation awarded under the impugned award is not likely to be

varied on lower side. This Court is, therefore, not inclined to

interfere with the impugned award. As such, the appeal stands

disposed of with the aforesaid observations.

7. The amount in deposit, if any, with this Court or the

Tribunal, be paid to the claimants with interest accrued thereon.

[R.G. AVACHAT, J.] KBP