Bombay High Court
The New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Gangubai Baban Katke And Ors on 27 November, 2025
2025:BHC-AUG:32610
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1437 OF 2011
WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5451 OF 2025
United India Assurance Company Ltd.,
Divisional office, No.I, Adalat Road,
Aurangabad, through its:
Senior Divisional Manager. ... APPELLANT
(orig. Respondent No.2)
VERSUS
1. Smt. Gangubai w/o Baban Katke
Age : 37 yrs., Occ.: Household,
R/o Pundliknagar Aurangabad
2. Aashabai d/o Baban Katke
Age : 19 yrs., Occu.: Household
R/o Pundliknagar Aurangabad
3. Punnam d/o Baban Katke
Age : 17 yrs., Occ.: Household,
R/o Pundliknagar Aurangabad
4. Vandanabai d/o Baban Katke
Age : 15 yrs., Occ.: Student & Minor,
R/o Pundliknagar Aurangabad
5. Sonayabai d/o Baban Katake
Age : 14 yrs., Occ.: Student
R/o Pundliknagar Aurangabad
6. Durgabai d/o Baban Katke
Age : 13 yrs., Occ.: Minor, Student
R/o Pundliknagar Aurangabad
7. Hanuman s/o Baban Katke
Age : 11 yrs., Occ.: Student, minor
fa1437.11.odt 1 of 6
R/o Pundliknagar Aurangabad
8. Pintibai d/o Baban Katke
Age : 7 yrs., Occ.: Minor, Student
R/o Pundliknagar Aurangabad ... RESPONDENTS
(Orgi. Claimants)
9. Rangnath s/o Murlidhar Katkade
(Dead) through his LR's
9a. Hemant s/o Rangnath Katkade
R/o. Manmad, Camp No.2,
Tq. Nandgaon, Dist. Nashik. (Orgi. Res.No.1)
Mr. M. M. Ambhore, Advocate for the Appellant
Mr. A. P. Gunge, Advocate for the Respondents
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J
RESERVED ON : NOVEMBER 24, 2025
PRONOUNCED ON : NOVEMBER 27, 2025
JUDGMENT :
-
1. This is an insurance Appeal wherein, judgment and
award passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Aurangabad in MACP No. 282 of 2007, dated 31.01.2009,
is taken exception.
2. In nutshell facts giving arise to present Appeal are as
under:
. Present Respondent Nos. 1 to 9 have filed MACP No.
282/2007 on the premise that, Baban Katke, a daily wage earner
fa1437.11.odt 2 of 6
was proceeding in a Tractor bearing No. MH-15/R-8769 on
14.12.2006. The said Tractor met with fatal accident and therefore
in the capacity of his LR's, present Respondents set up accident
claim by invoking Section 163-A of Motor Vehicle Act (for short 'MV
Act') seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.5 lakhs. The claim
was answered by learned Tribunal by appreciating the evidence on
record. Thereby partly allowing the claim and directing present
Appellant-Respondent therein in the Trial Court to pay amount of
Rs.4,00,410/- with 9% per annum interest. The same is assailed by
original Respondent No.2-Insurance Company.
3. Learned Counsel for Insurance Company would submit
that there is improper appreciation on the part of learned Tribunal
while allowing claim under Section 163-A of the MV Act. He pointed
out that settle legal position has not been taken into account. That
entire fault was on the part of deceased driver and there was no
other vehicle involved. Therefore, learned Tribunal ought not to
have allowed the claim. He further pointed out that even learned
Tribunal erred in applying multiplier in view of age of deceased.
Even rate of interest of which compensation is awarded is
exorbitant. For above reasons he urges to allow the Appeal.
fa1437.11.odt 3 of 6
4. Learned Counsel for Respondents supports the findings
and conclusion and points out that claim was under Section 163-A
of MV Act and as per schedule, learned Trial Court has awarded
compensation that impugned judgment carries discussion as
regards to settle legal position and therefore according to him no
fault can be found whatsoever in the impugned judgment.
5. Heard. Perused the papers and the impugned judgment.
As submitted, it appears that LR's of deceased set up claim of Rs.5
lakhs on account of death of Baban who was allegedly behind
wheels of Tractor bearing No. MH-15/R-8769 and the said Tractor
allegedly stopped and turned turtle inflicting injuries to which he
alleged scummed. Apparently, as pointed out by learned Counsel
for Respondents claim has been set up by invoking Section 163-A
of MV Act. This being the position, it is settled position that there is
no need for establishing negligence and compensation is provided
as per the structure formula provided in the statute itself.
6. There are judgments to this extent. Learned Counsel for
the Respondents has placed on record the judgment of the Hon'ble
Apex Court in case of The New India Assurance Company Limited
fa1437.11.odt 4 of 6
Versus Usha Devi and Others in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.
15191 of 2020 wherein the law to the extent of applicability of 163
has been enunciated.
7. Therefore, in view of settled legal position, there is no
substance in the grounds raised in the Appeal by Insurance
Company.
8. However, as rightly pointed out by learned Counsel for
the Appellant that when age of deceased was shown to be 40
years, in view of Sarla Verma & Ors vs Delhi Transport Corp.& Anr,
AIR 2009 SC 3104, multiplier which ought to have been invoked is
15 and not 16. On perusal of the judgment in paragraph No. 18,
learned Trial Court has applied 16 as the multiplier. Therefore,
interference to that extent is called for. As regards to the second
submission that exorbitant rate of interest is awarded, this Court
does not find any reason to interfere as merely 9% rate of interest
has been awarded. Therefore, with the above observations, Appeal
is dismissed for want of merits except on the point of modification
of order to the extent of application of multiplier.
fa1437.11.odt 5 of 6
9. In view of dismissal of the Appeal itself, Civil Application
No. 5451 of 2025 filed by the Original claimants for withdrawal of
amount is allowed in terms of prayer clause 'B'.
(ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J)
ssp
fa1437.11.odt 6 of 6
