Subhash Arjun Bhadane And Ors vs Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 14162 Bom

                                                First Appeal No.3521/2011
                                      :: 1 ::



           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                               BENCH AT AURANGABAD


                       FIRST APPEAL NO.3521 OF 2011


 Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd.
 Commerce House, First Floor,
 7th Race Course Road, Indore (M.P.),
 through C.S.E. Head                            ... APPELLANT

          VERSUS

 1.       Subhash Arjun Bhadane
          Age 47 years, Occu. Agriculturist

 2.       Sau Ashabai Subhash Bhadane,
          age 47 years, Occu. Household,

          Both R/o Samode, Taluka Sakri,
          District Dhule

 3.       Ajgar Asmat Shaikh,
          Age 26 years, Occu. Vehicle owner,
          R/o Safai Mohalla, Chinchni (Khadinaka)
          Taluka Dahanu, Dist. Thane         ... RESPONDENTS

                             .......
 Shri V.N. Upadhye, Advocate for appellant
 Shri A.D. Pawar, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2
                              .......

                                      WITH

                 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.9154 OF 2021 IN
                     FIRST APPEAL NO.3521 OF 2011


 1.       Subhash Arjun Bhadane
          Age 66 years, Occu. Agriculturist

 2.       Sau Ashabai Subhash Bhadane,
          age 61 years, Occu. Household,




::: Uploaded on - 05/10/2021                    ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2021 12:57:13 :::
                                                           First Appeal No.3521/2011
                                           :: 2 ::


          Both R/o Samode, Taluka Sakri,
          District Dhule             ...                       APPLICANTS

          VERSUS

 1.       Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd.
          A.F.L. House, Second Floor,
          Lok Bharti Complex, Marol Maroshi road,
          Andheri East, Mumbai - 400 059

 3.       Ajgar Asmat Shaikh,
          Age 26 years, Occu. Vehicle owner,
          R/o Safai Mohalla, Chinchni (Khadinaka)
          Taluka Dahanu, Dist. Thane         ... RESPONDENTS

                             .......
 Shri A.D. Pawar, Advocate for applicants
 Shri V.N. Upadhye, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2
                              .......

                                    CORAM :          R. G. AVACHAT, J.

                                    DATE :           30th September, 2021

 ORAL JUDGMENT :

This is an appeal filed by the Insurance Company,

taking exception to the judgment and award dated

4/12/2010, passed by Member, Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal, Dhule in Motor Accident Claim Petition 746/2008.

Under the impugned award, the compensation of

Rs.7,00,000/- has been awarded to the parents of the

deceased on account of death in a vehicular accident. The

appellant - Insurance Company has filed this appeal mainly

on the ground of contributory negligence on the part of the

deceased.

First Appeal No.3521/2011 :: 3 ::

2. Heard. Learned counsel for the appellant -

Insurance Company would submit that, the scene of accident

panchanama indicates that there was ample space for the

deceased to pass with his motorbike. It is a case of head on

collision. He, therefore, urged for holding it to be a case of

contributory negligence in equal proportion.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents claimants

would, on the other hand, submit that, the Tribunal has rightly

appreciated the factual matrix and there is no reason to

interfere with the impugned award.

4. Considered the rival submissions. Perused the

impugned award and the evidence relied on. It is true that, it

may appear to be a case of contributory negligence. The fact

is that, the rider of the offending vehicle has been prosecuted

for being responsible for the accident. True, the said fact may

not be conclusive to determine the negligence in civil matter.

The evidence on record, however, indicates that, the vehicle of

the deceased has suffered severe damage. There was no eye

witness to the incident. In the factual backdrop, this Court is

not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and

First Appeal No.3521/2011 :: 4 ::

award. The facts are that, the deceased was the only child of

his parents, who are age old and thereby unable to earn their

living. Since there being no reason to make interference with

the impugned award, the appeal is dismissed. Consequently,

Civil Application is disposed of.

The respondents No.1 and 2 claimants are

permitted to withdraw the amount deposited in this Court

along with interest accrued thereon.

( R. G. AVACHAT ) JUDGE

fmp/-