Tukaram Sitaram Bhil And Ors vs The Hdfc Ergo General Insurance ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 6794 Bom

                                           1
                                                                      9038.22CA

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                       72 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.9038 OF 2022
                         IN FIRST APPEAL NO.2869 OF 2021

                    TUKARAM SITARAM BHIL & OTHERS
                                   VERSUS
              THE HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
                                AURANGABAD
                                      ...
                    Advocate for Applicants : Mr.S.S.Patil
               Advocate for Respondent no.1 : Mr.M.R.Deshmukh
                                      ...
                                    CORAM : S.G.DIGE, J.
                                    DATE : 18.07.2022
          P.C. :

          1]               Heard the learned counsel for the applicants

          and respondent no.1. The learned counsel for the applicants

          submits that respondent no.1 has challenged the order of

          the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhule and has

          deposited the entire award amount before this Court. The

          applicants are causing hardship by not getting actual

          amount though the judgment and award is in their favour.

          The applicants have no other source of income. The

          accident took place in the year 1997 since then the

          applicants are somehow managing their day to day

          expenditure of livelihood including expenses of their family.




::: Uploaded on - 20/07/2022                    ::: Downloaded on - 21/07/2022 09:37:38 :::
                                               2
                                                                           9038.22CA

          Therefore, the applicants having dire necessity of amount of

          compensation.


          2]               The learned counsel for respondent no.1

          submits that respondent no.1 has filed appeal on two

          grounds, namely, the place where the accident took place

          was agricultural field and not a public place and the

          accident occurred in the thresher machine and not by dash

          of the tractor. If respondent no.1 succeeds in the appeal, it

          would be difficult for respondent no.1 to recover the

          amount from the applicants if they are permitted to

          withdraw the amount, hence, requested to dismiss the

          application.


          3]               I   have   heard   both     the     learned       counsel.

          Admittedly, accident took place in the year 1997 since then

          the applicants did not get a single rupee as compensation.

          The deceased was the Karta of the family of the applicants.

          The applicants have no source of income. They are facing

          hardship due to paucity of funds. Hence, I pass the

          following order : -




::: Uploaded on - 20/07/2022                         ::: Downloaded on - 21/07/2022 09:37:38 :::
                                              3
                                                                         9038.22CA

                                         ORDER

i] The applicants are permitted to withdraw 50% amount out of the deposited amount by giving undertaking. The prayer clause-C of the Application is also allowed.

ii] Civil Application is disposed of accordingly.

[S.G.DIGE] JUDGE DDC