Yogita W/O Yogesh Kokate And Ors vs Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 798 Bom

Bombay High Court

Yogita W/O Yogesh Kokate And Ors vs Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. ... on 12 January, 2024

2024:BHC-AUG:698
                                                                              57-ca-1269-2023.odt
                                                       (1)


                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                         BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                    CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1269 OF 2023
                                               IN FA/626/2022

                                       Yogita W/o Yogesh Kokate And Ors
                                                    VERSUS
                        Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., Thr Its Branch Manager,
                                               Aurangabad And Ors
                                                        ...
                          Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Shatilal J. Gaike And V.R. Thorat
                               Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Mr. M.R. Deshmukh
                                                        ...
                                                       CORAM : S.G. MEHARE, J.

                                                       DATED : JANUARY 12, 2024

                   PER COURT:-

                   1.            Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned

                   counsel for the insurer.

                   2.            The insurer is opposing the application mainly on the

                   ground that it was a fake compensation claim. It was transpired in

                   the investigation that the deceased himself was driving the vehicle

                   and he dashed against the stationery truck. However, the record was

                   manipulated and he was shown occupying the seat in the car owned

                   by his father which was insured with the appellant/insurance

                   company. Therefore, prima facie they are not entitled to withdraw

                   the amount.

                   3.            Per contra, learned counsel for the applicants would

                   submit that the Hon'ble Tribunal appreciated the evidence and

                   disbelieved the defence.     The deceased had a wife and two small
                                                                   57-ca-1269-2023.odt
                                          (2)


children.         They were dependent on them.         Applicant no.1 has no

income source and she is unable to maintain her two children.

Therefore, atleast for maintenance purpose, some amount may be

granted to her.

4.                 In the facts of case, the following order is passed :

                                       ORDER

I)           The application is partly allowed.

II)          Applicant nos.1 to 3 are allowed to withdraw Rs.5,00,000/-

(five lakh) from the amount deposited by the insurance company.

III) Applicant no.1 - Yogita should deposit Rs.2,00,000/- (two lakh)

each in the name of applicant nos.2 and 3, Yash Yogesh Kokate and

Aayush Yogesh Kokate in a fixed deposit in any of the nationalized

bank. Bank would grant quarterly interest for their maintenance.

IV) Applicant no.1 is allowed to withdraw Rs.1,00,000/- (one lakh)

for herself, on the undertaking that if the judgment is reversed, the

entire amount with the bank rate interest will be deposited.

(S.G. MEHARE, J.)

Mujaheed//