Thursday, 07, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Soni Nilesh Kapadia (Deleted)Thr. Next ... vs Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd., ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 4869 Bom

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 4869 Bom
Judgement Date : 17 April, 2025

Bombay High Court

Soni Nilesh Kapadia (Deleted)Thr. Next ... vs Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd., ... on 17 April, 2025

Author: G. S. Kulkarni
Bench: G. S. Kulkarni
2025:BHC-AS:18855-DB

                                                      1                             33-IA-4091-2025.doc


                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                          CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                   INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4091 OF 2025
                                                   IN
                                       FIRST APPEAL NO. 643 OF 2025
            1. Mrs. Soni Nilesh Kapadia
            (Since deceased through her legal heirs)
            Nilesh Hiralal Kapadia and Ors.
            2. Nilesh Hiralal Kapadia
            3. Mr. Dhruv Nilesh Kapadia                          ...Applicants/Orig. Claimants

            In the matter between
            Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.                                  ... Appellant
            Versus
            1. Mrs. Mrs. Soni Nilesh Kapadia
            (Since deceased through her legal heirs)
            2. Nilesh Hiralal Kapadia
            3. Mr. Dhruv Nilesh Kapadia
            4. Mr. Sanjay Singh Jaswant Singh Chauhan                            ... Respondents
                                             -----------------
            Mr. Bharat Gadhavi a/w Ms. Trusha Shah a/w Mr. Sarvesh Deshpande a/w Mr.
            Pratik Sabrad a/w Mr. Vinayak Shelar a/w Ms. Mansi Dande i/b Bharat Gadhavi, for
            Applicant.
            Mr. Avesh Ghadge i/b Mr. Akshay Kulkarni, for the Respondent.
                                             -----------------

                                                          CORAM : G. S. KULKARNI &
                                                                  ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ.

                                                          DATE      : 17 APRIL 2025

            JUDGMENT PER (Advait M. Sethna) .:-

            1.         This interim application is filed by the applicants (original claimants) for the



                 Mayur Adane                                                                             1/9



                     ::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2025                       ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2025 08:10:05 :::
                                            2                              33-IA-4091-2025.doc


following substantive relief, which reads thus:-

           "a. The Applicants/Orig. Claimants may kindly be allowed to withdraw
           the entire deposited amount of Rs. 1,52,24,641/- by the Appellant
           before this Hon'ble High Court."
2.         The applicants (original claimants) are family members of the deceased. The

applicant no. 2 is the husband and applicant no. 3 is the son of the deceased who

succumbed to injuries in the motor accident which took place on 30 May 2015. The

applicants lodged an FIR bearing Crime No. 55/2015 in Dalhousie Police Station,

District. Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, pursuant to such accident, which was

registered against the driver of the offending vehicle.

3.         We have heard Mr. Bharat Gadhavi, learned counsel for the applicants and

Mr. Avesh Ghadge, learned counsel for the respondents/appellant-insurance

company.           With their assistance we have perused the record. The interim

application is filed in the first appeal of the appellant-insurance company assailing

the judgment and award dated 23 November 2023 passed by the Motor Accident

Claim Tribunal, Mumbai ("MACT") in MACP No. 234 of 2017 ("Impugned

Judgment"). By the impugned judgment and award the appellant-insurance

company was directed to pay, jointly and severally a compensation of

Rs.1,03,20,000/- (Rupees One Crore Three Lakhs Twenty Thousand only) to the

applicants. The operative part of the impugned judgment and award reads thus :-

                                           "ORDER

       1) The claim-application is partly allowed with proportionate costs.

       2) The opposite party and insurer shall pay jointly and severally, compensation of
       Rs.1,03,20,000/- (Rupees One Crore Three Lakhs Twenty Thousand only) to the


     Mayur Adane                                                                               2/9



         ::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2025                         ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2025 08:10:05 :::
                                        3                               33-IA-4091-2025.doc


  claimants, inclusive of compensation amount granted u/Sec. 140 of Motor
  Vehicles Act, on the basis of No Fault Liability, within 30 days from the date of
  this order.
  3) The opposite party and insurer shall pay jointly and severally interest @7.5%
  p.a. on the amount of compensation to the claimants, from the date of registration
  of claim- till realization of said amount.
  4) The opposite party and the insurer shall jointly and severally deposit the
  compensation amount by NEFT/RTGS in the Savings Account in the State Bank
  of India, Empire House Branch, Fort, Mumbai. The accounts details are as under:
  Account Name: Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mumbai
  Account No. : 00000040777482356.
  IFS Code : SBIN0030002.
  MICR Code : 400002273.
  5) Out of the total compensation amount, 60% amount be paid to the claimant
  No.1 and 40% be paid to the claimant No.2.
  6) Out of the share of claimant Nos.1 and 2, Rs.10,00,000/- each be invested in
  their respective names in any Nationalized Bank for a period of 5 years and
  remaining amount be paid to them through NEFT/RTGS.
  7) After maturity period, the invested amount with accrued interest be directly
  credited to the bank account of the claimants or it be dealt with as per the
  direction of the claimants without reference to this Tribunal.
  8) The Account Officer shall inform the bank to submit a copy of FDR and the
  intimation of release of such amount after maturity to this Tribunal.
  9) The Accounts Officer shall transfer the compensation amount in the bank
  account of the claimants, by NEFT/RTGS on due verification and as per rules,
  after furnishing necessary details by claimants as follows -
  a) Name and address of the claimants,
  b) Name of Bank and Branch of claimants,
  c) Bank Account Number,
  d) Bank IFSC code,
  e) Copy of first page of bank passbook containing photograph of the claimants
  duly attested by the concerned bank,
  f) Self attested copies of Aadhar card and PAN card.
  10) All interim applications filed in this claim-application stands disposed off.
  11) The claimants shall deposit deficit court fees if any, within a period of 8 days
  from the date of this order.
  12) Award be drawn accordingly."

Mayur Adane                                                                                 3/9



    ::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2025                           ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2025 08:10:05 :::
                                         4                            33-IA-4091-2025.doc


4.         Mr. Gadhavi, learned counsel for the applicants in support of the interim

application would press for withdrawal of the entire amount with interest as

deposited by the appellant - insurance company with the MACT. He would refer to

an order passed by a coordinate bench of this Court dated 12 December 2024, by

which the appellant - insurance company was directed to deposit the entire decretal

amount of Rs.1,03,20,000/- with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of registration

of the claim petition filed before the MACT, until the date of such deposit. On such

condition, the Court stayed the impugned judgment and award passed by the

MACT, Mumbai. The applicants (original claimants) through this interim

application, are seeking the withdraw of the entire amount of Rs.1,03,20,000/-

along with proportionate accrued interest at 7.5% p.a. which is approximately

Rs.1,52,24,641/- deposited with the MACT by the appellant - insurance company.

5.         Mr. Gadhavi would urge that the appellant- insurance company has failed to

prove their case before the MACT. No statutory defence whatsoever was raised by

the appellant. The applicants had duly examined the Chartered Accountant of the

claimant who filed the returns of the applicants as also the nurse who looked after

the deceased from 15 September 2015 to 31 March 2018, to prove their claim

before the MACT. He would submit that there is no evidence to the contrary led by

the appellant-insurance company and thus the claim of the applicants stood proved

before the MACT.

6.         Mr. Gadhavi would then urge that the deceased had sustained severe injuries

namely chronic respiratory failure, concussion and oedema of cervical spinal cord,


     Mayur Adane                                                                          4/9



         ::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2025                    ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2025 08:10:05 :::
                                          5                            33-IA-4091-2025.doc


urinary tract infection, complex cervical spinal cord injury. She was unable to move

her lower and upper limbs and was diagnosed with flaccid quadriplegia and other

grave, serious injuries to which she ultimately succumbed. Faced with such serious

injuries the deceased had to undergone rigorous medical treatments and for such

treatment which lasted for a period of about five years the medical expenses were

quantified at Rs. 1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). This caused a huge financial

drain on the resources of the surviving applicants. The MACT had in its impugned

judgment and award carefully perused the income tax returns of the applicants

which were placed on record for the assessment years 2016-17 which was

Rs.5,38,07,1/- to the assessment years 2010-11 which was Rs. 5,99,855/-. The

maximum income of the applicants as submitted before the MACT was Rs.

9,69,215/- p.a which according to the applicants was duly proved by leading

evidence of the chartered accountant. There is nothing contrary placed on record by

the appellant-insurance company to disprove these aspects.

7.                 Mr. Gadhavi would urge that the applicant no. 2 being the husband of

the deceased had to incur huge financial liability and in fact had to borrow large

amounts to defray the medical expenses of the deceased. The applicant no. 2 had

also borrowed money from friend and relatives to provide such medical treatment to

the deceased which went on for about five years, as a result of which the entire

business of the applicant no. 2 came to a virtual stand still. The applicant no. 3

being the son of the deceased has been perusing higher studies and is in dire need of

finances to support the educational requirements, particularly expenses towards


     Mayur Adane                                                                           5/9



         ::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2025                     ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2025 08:10:05 :::
                                         6                           33-IA-4091-2025.doc


professional courses for which the applicants are burdened with student loan to

support such expenses for applicant no. 2. The applicants are finding it extremely

difficult and reeling under stress to even manage their day to day expenses, essential

for a living.

8.         Mr. Ghadge would oppose the interim application. He would rely on the

affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the appellant-insurance company of Mr. Rohit

Prasad, legal manager of the appellant dated 2 April 2025. He would first submit

that the applicants have failed to prove the medical expenses as claimed by them

before the MACT. In this context he would submit that the MACT gravely erred in

awarding Rs. 10,20,000/- as attendance charges to the attendant nurse of the

deceased as there was no evidence in this regard lead by the applicants to prove their

claim.

9.         Mr. Ghadge would dispute the disability of 100% of the deceased as the

applicants failed to prove this before the MACT. According to the appellant, merely

relying on the certificate issued by the Doctor was not enough in reaching a

conclusion on such disability. The MACT has seriously erred in not appreciating

and overlooking this vital aspect. The MACT further erred in not considering even

after such disability she was earning handsome income and there was no loss of

income as alleged by the claimants.

10.        Mr. Ghadge would urge that if the prayer of the applicants in the Interim

application is allowed the appellant apprehends that such amount as withdrawn

would never come back to the grave prejudice of the appellant-insurance company.


     Mayur Adane                                                                         6/9



         ::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2025                   ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2025 08:10:05 :::
                                       7                             33-IA-4091-2025.doc


He would therefore urge that the prayer for withdrawal of the entire amount ought

not to be granted in the facts and circumstances in the present case.

11.     On consideration of the above, we may observe that the applicants have

made out a sufficient case for withdrawal of the amounts as set out in the interim

application. It is apparent that pursuant to the accident the deceased had suffered

extremely serious and life threatening disability which made her completely

dependent on applicant nos. 2 and 3. In light of the serious injuries, she suffered

including her diagnosis of flaccid quadriplegia it cannot be disputed that huge

medical expenses would have been incurred for her treatment which went on for

about five years. We see no reason at this prima facie stage to disbelieve the medical

condition of the deceased as also the expenses that would have been incurred by the

surviving applicants in the peculiar facts and circumstances including the expenses

for medical treatment and medical charges of the attendant. The deceased/victim,

though being an engineer earning substantial amount per month the fateful

accident completely deprived her and her family of the income of about Rs.

75,000/- per month which was her earning capacity. In this view of the matter, the

applicant nos. 2 and 3 were faced with huge financial crisis before them as such

incidents like the accident in the present case are not planned, or designed but

rather come as a rude shock and a colossal blow to the family which is completely

unforeseen and unpredictable. Considering the fact that the applicant no. 3 is

pursing her education, it would follow that higher studies in today's contemporary

times would incur huge expenditure particularly when one engaged is in


  Mayur Adane                                                                            7/9



      ::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2025                      ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2025 08:10:05 :::
                                       8                              33-IA-4091-2025.doc


professional courses. These are the need of the hour and one cannot compromise on

such basic needs of life. It is to meet such huge monetary liability of the deceased

and to also meet the day to day expenses that the applicants would be in urgent

need of finances. We may observe that though the appellant-insurance company has

filed a reply affidavit, these issues in particular as raised by the applicants have not

been disputed and or controverted by the appellant-insurance company in its reply

affidavit.

12.             We may also observe that the MACT has in the impugned judgment

considered the income of the applicants on the basis of income tax returns which

was claimed to be proved by the applicants. As claimed by them the maximum

income of the applicants would not exceed Rs.9,69,215/- p.a which is hardly

enough to maintain even a basic standard of living in today's day and age. This is

also not controverted in the affidavit in reply to the interim application. We may

observe that the apprehension of the appellant-insurance company to the effect that

the amounts once withdrawn by the applicants would never come back would be

addressed adequately in our order below.

13.             For the reasons as noted above, we are inclined to grant a partial

withdrawal to the extent of 75 % to the applicants. Such relief would serve the

interest of justice as would appeal to our conscience. Needless to mention that

withdrawal of such amount is by no stretch and expression on merits of the rival

contentions of the parties to be urged in the appeal. We, therefore pass the following

order.


  Mayur Adane                                                                             8/9



      ::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2025                       ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2025 08:10:05 :::
                                          9                            33-IA-4091-2025.doc


                                         ORDER

(i) The Registry of this Court is directed to remit the amount deposited

with it by the appellant to the MACT within period of one week from

today. The Registry of MACT, Mumbai is directed to permit the

applicants to withdraw the 75% of Rs.1,03,20,000/- i.e.,

Rs.77,40,000/- (Rs. Seventy-Seven Lakhs Forty Thousand only) as

deposited by the appellant-insurance company along with the

proportionate accrued interest on such amount, within a period of two

weeks thereafter along with the withdrawal application of the

applicant.

(ii) The above withdrawal is subject to the undertaking to be furnished by

the applicants with the Registry of MACT, Mumbai to the effect that in

the event the appellant-insurance company succeeds in the appeal, the

applicants shall bring back the amount as deposited along with interest

which shall be recovered as arrears of land revenue.

(iii) All rights and contentions of the parties in the appeal are

expressly kept open.

(iv) Interim Application is disposed of in the above terms.

(v) Parties to act on authenticated copy of this order.

 [ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.]                                  [G. S. KULKARNI, J.]









 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter