National Insurance Co Ltd. vs Meena Ramdas Bendre And Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 7601 Bom

Bombay High Court

National Insurance Co Ltd. vs Meena Ramdas Bendre And Ors on 17 November, 2025

2025:BHC-AUG:31416
                                                   -1-
                                                                              FA-2107-2011

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                  FIRST APPEAL NO. 2107 OF 2011
                                              WITH
                                CIVIL APPLICATION NO.8893 OF 2008
                                         IN FA/2107/2011

              National Insurance Company Limited,
              Through its Divisional Manager,
              Hazari Chambers, Station Road, Aurangabad.              ... Appellant
                                                                         [Orig. Resp. No.2]

                           Versus

              1.     Meena W/o. Ramdas Bendre,
                     Age : 38 years, Occu. : Nil,
                     R/o. Babhleshwar, Taluka Rahata,
                     District : Ahmednagar.

              2.     Kudhari D/o. Ramdas Bendre,
                     Age : 18 years, Occu. : Education,
                     R/o. As Above.

              3.     Vaishali D/o. Ramdas Bendre,
                     Age : 16 years, Occu. : Education,

              4.     Tushar S/o. Ramdas Bendre,
                     Age : 15 years, Occu. : Education,
                     Nos.3 & 4 minors under guardianship
                     of mother respondent No.1 (Claimant No.1),

              5.     Dhondiram S/o. Maruti Bendre,
                     Age : 71 years, Occu. : Agri.,
                     R/o. As Above,

              6.     Janabai W/o. Dhondiram Bendre,
                     Age : 61 years, Occu. : Household,
                     R/o. As Above,                           (Nos.1 to 6 Orig. Claimants)


              7.     Rajendra Murlidhar Saykar,
                     Age : 24 years, Occu. : Service,
                     R/o. Ganeshnagar, Tq. Rahata,            (Orig. Resp. No.1)
                     Dist. Ahmednagar.                                ... Respondents.
                                   -2-
                                                           FA-2107-2011



                                   ......
Mr. S. P. Chapalgaonkar, Advocate for Appellant - Insurance Company
Mr. S. K. Shinde, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 6.
Mr. Rushikesh Lohe h/f. Mr. Anand Bhandari, Advocate for Respondent
No.7
                                   ......

                              CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
                      RESERVED ON : 11 NOVEMBER 2025
                  PRONOUNCED ON : 17 NOVEMBER 2025

JUDGMENT :

1. Insurance Company - original respondent no.2 is hereby

taking exception to grant of compensation by learned Motor Accident

Claims Tribunal, Sangamner in M.A.C.P. No. 532 of 2002 by which

present respondents are beneficiaries of compensation to the tune of

Rs.3,00,000/- with 6% per annum rate of interest on account of

accidental death of Ramdas.

FACTS GIVING RISE TO THE CLAIM FOR TRIAL ARE AS UNDER

2. Deceased Ramdas was returning home on his motorcycle, at

that time, he was given dash by another motorcycle bearing No. MH-17-

H-8756 causing multiple and grievous injuries and succumbed to the

same while undergoing treatment. Therefore, original claimants filed an

accident claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.3,00,000/-. The claim

petition was contested by original respondent no.1 as well as respondent

no.2 i.e. present appellant - insurance company. Learned Accident

FA-2107-2011

Claims Tribunal reached to a finding that there was rash and negligence

on the part of motorcycle driver and as such claimants are entitled for

compensation. Learned tribunal was pleased to award compensation to

the tune of Rs.3,00,000/- under various heads. It further directed the

respondents to jointly and severally pay the said compensation.

Above judgment and award of learned tribunal is taken

exception to by insurance company by filing instant appeal.

SUBMISSIONS

3. According to learned counsel for insurance company, there is

only challenge to the quantum of compensation awarded, as according to

him, there was no iota of evidence in support of so called employment of

deceased Ramdas in a sugar factory. He pointed out that, only one

month's salary slip of the deceased Ramdas was placed on record and the

same was directly considered by the learned tribunal. That, no witness in

support of salary income was examined. That, even the learned tribunal

in absence of evidence held that deceased was conducting milk business

and earning agricultural income, and awarded Rs.30,000/- towards the

said loss. For above reasons, learned counsel urges to set aside the

impugned judgment and award of learned tribunal.

4. In answer to above, learned counsel for respondents original

FA-2107-2011

claimants would support the judgment and order of tribunal by pointing

out that salary slip has been taken on record for consideration salary

income of deceased Ramdas. The same has been correctly appreciated.

However, according to him, learned tribunal has failed to grant

compensation under the head of loss of consortium and medical expenses

for the medical treatment till deceased Ramdas expired and no amount

has also been granted towards funeral expenses.

5. In the light of above submissions, here, there is no dispute

about rash and negligence on the part of original respondent no.1 or

about vehicle to be insured with respondent no.2. Though in the trial

court, insurance company - appellant has taken a plea that there was

breach of conditions, there is no evidence in that regard. Admittedly,

learned counsel has confined his grievance to the quantum. According to

him, there was only one month salary slip or no witness in support of

salary allegedly received by deceased Ramdas, was examined. In the

light of above such arguments, the impugned judgment is visited, and it

is noticed that learned tribunal has dealt such aspect while deciding issue

nos.4 to 6. The said salary slip placed on record shows that deceased

Ramdas was working as Mukadam in Pravara Sugar Factory Irrigation

Department. In view of the salary certificate on record, there is no reason

to disbelieve the same. As regards to allied business of milk and

FA-2107-2011

agriculture is concerned, learned tribunal has observed that there is no

distinct evidence in support of agricultural income to the tune of

Rs.1,00,000/- and earning of Rs.4,500/- per month from milk business.

However, learned tribunal has correctly held that from all sources,

deceased might be earning Rs.30,000/- yearly. Appropriate 1/3rd

deductions for personal expenses are also made from above income to

derive annual income, no fault can be found in the said computation

made by the tribunal.

6. Learned counsel for respondents has pointed out that

learned tribunal has not granted amount under the heads of loss of

consortium, medical expenses and funeral expenses.

7. Indeed, on going through the judgment under challenge, one

does not come across any amount is granted under such heads. In view of

the ratio laid down in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay

Sethi and Ors., 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1270 ; Magma General Insurance

Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and Others, (2018) 18 SCC 130

and Nagappa Vs. Gurudayal Singh and Others, (2003) 2 SCC 274,

claimants are entitled for Rs.40,000/- each, i.e. 2,40,000 /- plus 50%

(Rs.1,20,000/-) which comes to Rs.3,60,000/- towards loss of

consortium. There is no evidence as regards to medical expenses

FA-2107-2011

allegedly incurred while he was admitted in the hospital from 26.03.2000

to 30.03.2000. Therefore, considering the fatal injuries allegedly

suffered, it would be just and proper to award Rs.40,000/- towards

medical expenses allegedly incurred for treatment. Likewise, claimants

are also entitled for compensation under the head of funeral expenses to

the tune of Rs.5,000/-.

8. In view of the aforesaid discussion, claimants are entitled for

following compensation :

     Sr.                        Heads                         Amount (Rs.)
     No.
      1. Annual Income                                               30,000/-
      2. Less 1/3rd deduction towards personal                       20,000/-
         expenses.
         (Rs. 30,000 - Rs. 10,000)
      3. Multiplier of 15 (20,000 X 15)                            3,00,000/-
      4. Loss of consortium = 3,60,000/-                           4,05,000/-

           Medical Expenses = Rs.40,000/-

           Funeral expenses = Rs.5,000/-

      5. Total compensation to be paid                             7,05,000/-
      6. Compensation awarded by Tribunal                          3,00,000/-
      7. Total Enhanced Compensation                               4,05,000/-
         (i.e. Rs.7,05,000 - 3,00,000)

9. In the result, following order is passed :-