Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 16268 Bom
Judgement Date : 24 November, 2021
970-FA-1709-21.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1709 OF 2021
AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14266 OF 2019
IN
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1709 OF 2021
IFFCO Tokyo General Insurance Co. Ltd.
Through it's authorised signatory,
Aurangabad ..APPELLANT/APPLICANT
VERSUS
Mangal Arjun Chavan and Others ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. S.G. Chapalgaonkar, Advocate for appellant/applicant
Mr. R.B. Deshpande, Advocate for respondent nos. 1 to 5
....
CORAM : R.G. AVACHAT, J.
DATED : 24th NOVEMBER, 2021
PER COURT :
1. Heard.
2. The challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and award dated
29th January, 2019 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Shrirampur in M.A.C.P. No. 144 of 2017. The challenge is mainly on the
ground of involvement of the vehicle and quantum as well.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant - insurance company would
submit that there is five days' delay in lodging the report of the accident. The
1 / 3
970-FA-1709-21.odt
widow of the deceased was not an eye witness to the accident. Her evidence
is, therefore, of little consequence to make out involvement of the vehicle in
question. On the question of quantum, learned counsel would submit that
the deceased was running an electronic shop in a remote place. However,
there is no concrete evidence to prove his income. The notional income of
Rs.8,000/- per month has, therefore, been on higher side.
4. Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the
appellant and respondents as well. Perused the evidence on record. Although
the widow of the deceased was not an eye witness to the accident, she
referred in her evidence police papers indicating the involvement of the
vehicle in question. Her evidence in that regard appears to have not been
traverse in her cross examination. On investigation, charge-sheet has been
filed against the driver of the offending vehicle. There is no contra evidence
to disbelieve her claim.
5. On the question of quantum of compensation, it appears that the
learned counsel, who appeared for the appellant - insurance company before
the tribunal gave a concession to assume income at Rs.8,000/- per month.
The tribunal, however, considered it at Rs.9,000/- per month and worked out
the compensation in terms of the Apex Court judgment in the case of
National Insurance Company Vs. Pranay Sethi reported in (2017) 16 SCC
2 / 3
970-FA-1709-21.odt
680. Perusal of the impugned judgment and award would indicate that each
of the claimants, who are five in number, have not been granted
compensation on the ground of loss of love and affection. The same should
have been granted in terms of the Apex Court judgment in the case of Magma
General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and Others
reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130. As such, even if we consider the claim of the
appellant - insurance company that assumed income is somewhat on higher
side, the respondents - claimants are very much justified in defending the
award, since they have not been granted Rs.40,000/- each on account of loss
of love and affection.
6. As such, the amount of compensation awarded appears to be just
and reasonable one. No case is made out for interference with the impugned
judgment and award. In the result, the appeal fails. Same stands disposed
of. In view of the same, civil application also stands disposed of.
7. The amount in deposit be paid to the respondents - claimants
alongwith interest accrued thereon, immediately.
( R.G. AVACHAT, J. ) SSD
3 / 3
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!