Bombay High Court
Smt. Usha Mohan Patil And Anr vs The New India Insurance Company ... on 6 July, 2023
Bench: Abhay Ahuja
3.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL NO.568 OF 2018
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. )...APPELLANT
V/s.
USHA MOHAN PATIL AND OTHERS )...RESPONDENTS
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO.1341 OF 2022
USHA MOHAN PATIL AND OTHERS )...APPELLANTS
V/s.
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS. )...RESPONDENTS
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2405 OF 2021
Mr.Akshay Kulkarni, Advocate for the Applicant in IA/2405/21 and for
the Respondents in FA/568/2018 and for the Appellants in
FA/1341/2022.
Mr.D.S.Joshi a/w. Mr.P.Thakurdesai, Advocate for the Appellant.
CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J.
DATE : 6th JULY 2023
P.C. :
1. First Appeal No.1341 of 2022 is not on board. Taken on board.
avk 1/4
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/07/2023 19:24:47 :::
3.doc
2. These two Appeals, the first one filed by the Insurance Company
and the second one by original claimants impugns the judgment and
award dated 10th August 2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Sangli in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.77 of 2014.
3. Mr.Devendranath Joshi, learned Counsel for the Insurance
Company, would submit that the Insurance Company is primarily
aggrieved on two counts : one is that the Tribunal ought to have held
that in case of head-on collision between the deceased riding the
motorcycle and the dumper, the deceased was solely negligent for the
accident, since he was in a better position to avoid the accident as he
was driving a smaller vehicle. Learned Counsel would submit that the
Tribunal ought to have held the deceased solely liable for the accident
when it was not the case of the claimants that the dumper came from
the wrong side of the road. The second point is on the quantum.
Mr.Joshi would submit that considering that the deceased was solely
negligent, the Tribunal ought not to have considered the income of the
deceased as Rs.6,000/- per month after recording a categorical finding
that the claimants have not proved the income of the deceased at the
time of his death.
avk 2/4
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/07/2023 19:24:47 :::
3.doc
4. On the other hand, Mr.Kulkarni, learned Counsel for the
Respondent in the Insurance Company's Appeal and Appellant in
Appeal No.1341 of 2022 would submit that the claimants have filed the
Appeal for enhancement of compensation, as although the claim was
for Rs.22,49,910/- with interest, the Tribunal has awarded only
Rs.7,44,000/- with interest. Learned Counsel would submit that apart
from the fact that the dumper was solely negligent resulting in the
death of the deceased, on the issue of quantum, although the claimants
had adduced evidence that the deceased was getting a salary of
Rs.8,000/- per month from Mahindra and Mahindra, yet the Tribunal
has taken an amount of Rs.6,000/- to compute the compensation. He
would submit that these and other issues including age of the deceased,
wrong multiplier, future prospects have also not been considered by the
Tribunal.
5. Having heard the learned Counsel and with their able assistance
having perused the grounds as well as the impugned order, the
following order is passed :
ORDER
(i) Admit.
(ii) Registry is directed to call for Record and Proceedings within a
period of four weeks.
avk 3/4
3.doc
(iii) Let private paper book be filed within a period of four weeks
thereafter, with a copy to the other side.
(iv) List the Appeals for final disposal on 7th September 2023 subject
to removal of all office objections.
(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)
avk 4/4
