Shridevi Madhukar Tope And Ors vs M/S Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7174 Bom

                                           1
                                                                       6453.22CA

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                           BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                      947 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6453 OF 2022
                          IN FIRST APPEAL NO.25 OF 2022

                  SHRIDEVI MADHUKAR TOPE & OTHERS
                                VERSUS
            M/S. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AURANGABAD &
                               ANOTHER

                                         ...
               Advocate for the applicants : Ms.Kirti A.Deshpande h/f.
                                Mr.M.M.Bhokarikar
                 Advocate for Respondent no.1 : Mr.V.N.Upadhye
                                         ...

                                         CORAM : S.G.DIGE, J.
                                         DATE : 26.07.2022
          P.C. :



          1]               Heard the learned counsel for the applicants

          and learned counsel for respondent no.1.


          2]               The learned counsel for the applicants submits

          that respondent no.1 has preferred an Appeal against the

          judgment and award passed by the learned Motor Accident

          Claims Tribunal, Jalgaon and has deposited the entire

          award amount before this Court. The deceased was the

          Karta of the applicants' family. There is no source of income




::: Uploaded on - 29/07/2022                     ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2022 06:32:34 :::
                                             2
                                                                        6453.22CA

          to the applicants and it is difficult for them to survive day

          by day, hence, requested to allow the present application.


          3]               The learned counsel for respondent no.1

          strongly objected to allow the application on the ground

          that respondent no.1 has raised various grounds in the

          appeal. If respondent no.1 succeeds in the appeal, it would

          be difficult for respondent no.1 to recover the amount from

          the applicants, hence, requested to dismiss the application.


          4]               I have heard both learned counsel. Admittedly,

          husband of respondent no.1, father of respondent nos.2 to 4

          and son of respondent no.5 is died in the accident. The

          learned Tribunal has passed reasoned order. The grounds

          raised in the appeal by respondent no.1 can be considered

          at the time of final hearing. The applicants are needed

          money for day to day survival, hence, I pass the following

          order :

                                         ORDER

i] The application is allowed.

6453.22CA

ii] The applicants are permitted to withdraw 30% amount along with accrued interest thereon by furnishing undertaking and 20% amount by furnishing solvent surety as per their share.

iii] Civil Application is disposed of accordingly.

[S.G.DIGE] JUDGE DDC