[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Rukhmanbai Sitaram More And Anr vs Nasar Khan Munshi Khan And Ors on 12 December, 2025
2025:BHC-AUG:34779
FA-3757-2016.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 3757 OF 2016
1. Rukhmanbai Wd/o Sitaram More,
Age: 50 years, Occu. Household,
R/o. Bhilpattam Galli,
Kannad, Taluka- Kannad
District - Aurangabad
2. Vinod S/o Sitaram More,
Age: 30 years, Occu. Nil,
R/o. As above ...Appellants
(Orig. Claimants)
Versus
1. Nasar Khan S/o Munshi Khan
Age: 39 years, Occu. Driver,
R/o. Sahab Nagar, Taluka-Chhata,
Dist. Mathura (U.P.),
Police Station Rayargad
2. Rustum Khan S/o Isak Khan
Age: Major, Occu. Business,
R/o. Village Dond Kalan, Ward No.1,
Firozpur, Zahirka Mewat,
Dist - Mewat (Haryana State)
3. The Divisional Manager,
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd.
Having Office at - Adalat Road,
Aurangabad, Dist. Aurangabad ...Respondents
....
• Mr. S. S. Rathi, Advocate for Appellants
• Mr. M. R. Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No. 3
....
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J
RESERVED ON : DECEMBER 10, 2025
PRONOUNCED ON : DECEMBER 12, 2025
PAGE 1 OF 5
FA-3757-2016.odt
JUDGMENT :
1. Original Claimants hereby takes exception to judgment and
award passed by MACT, Aurangabad in MACP No. 80/2012, primarily
dissatisfied by quantum of compensation awarded.
2. On 11.12.2011 when deceased Rahul Sitaram More was
proceeding on motorcycle bearing no. MH-05-A-8717 towards Kannad,
when he reached near the field of Raosaheb Nagre situated at village
Tapargaon, one truck bearing no. HR-74-6466 came in very high and
excessive speed and gave dash to the motorcycle. Due to fatal injuries
therein, Rahul succumbed and, therefore, claimants being his heirs, set up
accident claim by invoking Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act against
Respondent.
Above claim was contested by Insurance Company and finally,
by judgment and order dated 20.07.2016, learned Tribunal was pleased to
grant compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,16,000/- with 9% p.a. rate of
interest.
Dissatisfied by the non consideration monthly income to the
tune of Rs. 6,000/-, instant appeal has been pressed into service.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants claimants submitted that,
there is no dispute that deceased Rahul died in road traffic accident and that
there is challenge that offending truck was rash and negligent. He pointed
PAGE 2 OF 5
FA-3757-2016.odt
out that, deceased who was 20 years of age, has completed ITI Course as ell
as MS-CIT i.e. computer course and was earning Rs. 10,000/- to Rs.
12,000/- per month. That, learned Tribunal has failed to consider the
educational qualification and acquisitions of the deceased. That, learned
Tribunal has failed to consider these aspects and considered the monthly
income of deceased only to the tune of Rs. 4,500/-. That, even filial
consortium ought to have been paid at Rs. 40,000/- per claimant in view of
the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Magma General
Insurance Co. Ltd vs. Nanu Ram and Ors, 2018 ALL SCR 2001.
4. Learned counsel for insurance company opposed and refuted
above submissions and justified the findings and conclusion reached by
Tribunal.
5. After considering above submissions, here primarily appeal is
filed on the count of non consideration of monthly income of deceased. As
regards to monthly income of the deceased is concerned, though it is claim
by claimant that deceased was doing work of plumber and was earning Rs.
15,000/- to Rs. 18,000/- p.m., claimants have failed to produce any
documentary evidence to show that deceased was earning Rs. 15,000/- to
Rs. 18,000/- p.m.
6. Learned Tribunal has taken into account the educational
PAGE 3 OF 5
FA-3757-2016.odt
qualifications and acquisitions of deceased that there is document showing
that deceased has completed training course of sanitary fitting and
plumbing from I.T.I. Kannad and has also undergone preparatory program
conducted by Y.C.M. Open University, Nashik. Further, learned Tribunal has
also observed in paragraph 21 of the judgment and award that it is proved
that deceased was a skilled worker, however, has consider notional income
of Rs. 4,500/- in those time. Resultantly, this Court is of the consider opinion
that, the deceased as was skilled worker, he might have definitely earned
around Rs.5,500/- per month.
7. As far as the amount of consortium is concerned, in view of the
judgment in case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd (supra), consortium
Rs.40,000/- towards per dependent needs to be allowed and it is
accordingly granted.
8. In view of the aforesaid discussion, claimants are entitled for
following compensation:
Sr. Heads Amount (Rs.)
No.
1. Income Rs. 5,500/- per month x 12 =Rs.66,000/- (-) 50% 5,94,000/-
deduction towards personal expenses= Rs. 33,000/- x 18
multiplier = Rs. 5,94,000/-
2. Consortium 40,000/-
3. Funeral expenses 30,000/-
4. Total compensation to be paid Rs. 6,64,000/-
5. Compensation awarded by Tribunal Rs. 5,16,000/-
6. Total enhanced compensation Rs. 1,48,000/-
PAGE 4 OF 5
FA-3757-2016.odt
9. In the result, following order is passed:
ORDER
(i) Appeal is partly allowed with proportionate costs.
(ii) Impugned judgment and award dated 20.07.2016 in Motor
Accident Claim Petition No. 80/2012 passed by Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Aurangabad is modified.
(iii) Respondents to pay enhanced compensation of Rs.
6,64,000/- to claimant within 12 weeks from today along
with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of registration
of claim petition till its realization.
(iv) Modified award be prepared accordingly.
(v) Claimant to pay court fees on enhanced compensation as
per rules.
(vi) On deposit of the amount, appellants/claimants are
permitted to withdraw the same.
(vii) Rest of the judgment and award of Tribunal is maintained.
(viii) Pending civil application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
(ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.)
Umesh
PAGE 5 OF 5
