[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Reliance Insurance Company Ltd. vs Sarika Shyamsinngh Walmiki And Ors. on 6 January, 2026
2026:BHC-AS:463 10-FA(ST)-31974-2025.DOC
Rekha Patil
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 31974 OF 2025
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13725 OF 2025
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13726 OF 2025
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13724 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 31974 OF 2025
Reliance Insurance Company Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
Sarika Shyamsingh Walmiki and Ors. ...Respondents
Mrs. Kalpana Trivedi, for the Appellant.
Mr. Jitendra Gor, for the Respondents.
CORAM: R. M. JOSHI, J.
DATED: 6th JANUARY 2026
PC:-
1. By consent of both the sides, heard finally at the stage of
Admission.
2. This Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle
Act, 1988 ('MV Act' for short) against the Judgment and Award
dated 24th June, 2025, passed in MACP No. 64 of 2022.
3. The facts which led to the filing of this Appeal can be
narrated in brief as under :
Page 1 of 5
th
6 January 2026
::: Uploaded on - 07/01/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 07/01/2026 20:41:12 :::
10-FA(ST)-31974-2025.DOC
It is the case of the claimant before the Tribunal that on
15/10/2021, the deceased was proceeding on his motorcycle
bearing No. MH-05-DD-3842. When he reached to the spot of the
accident, another motorcycle bearing registration No. MH-05-BT-
1343 came in high speed in rash and negligent manner and
dashed to the motorcycle of the deceased. In the said accident he
sustained severe injuries and succumbed thereto on 22 nd October,
2021. An offence came to be registered against the rider of the
offending motorcycle being Crime No. 571 of 2021 with
Ambarnath Police Station. The claimants contended that the
deceased was employed with Facility Management Services Ltd.,
Pune and was earning Rs.20,000/- per month.
4. The owner of the offending vehicle filed Written Statement
denying the negligence on the part of the rider of the said
motorcycle in occurrence of the accident. It is claimed that the
offending vehicle was insured with opponent No.2 at the relevant
time. The Opponent-Insurer filed Written Statement at Exh. 17
accepting the coverage of the liability of insured in respect of the
offending vehicle during the relevant period. The contentions of
the claimant with regard to the occurrence of the accident,
however, came to be denied. It is further claimed that the rider of
the offending motorcycle was not holding valid and effecting
driving licence and as such, there is breach of terms and
conditions of insurance policy.
5. Before the Tribunal the claimants led evidence of Sarika at
Exh. 19 and placed reliance on the police papers and the copy of
Page 2 of 5
th
6 January 2026
::: Uploaded on - 07/01/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 07/01/2026 20:41:12 :::
10-FA(ST)-31974-2025.DOC
charge-sheet. The insurer examined Legal Manager Mr. Rohit
Prasad at Exh. 41 and also placed reliance on documentary
evidence. The Tribunal allowed the claim, hence, this Appeal.
6. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Tribunal
has failed to take into consideration the facts as they are
appearing from the evidence on record indicating the contributory
negligence of the deceased in occurrence of the accident. It is her
submission that though no specific evidence has been led by the
insurer to prove the said contentions, in view of the material on
record and as two motorcycles are involved in the accident, the
contributory negligence of the deceased be held therein.
7. On the point of breach of contention of policy, it is
submitted that the insurer has examined the witness indicating
that the driver of the offending motorcycle was not holding a valid
licence during the relevant time. On the quantum, it is argued that
the learned Tribunal has committed error in accepting the case of
the claimant without proving the employment and income of the
deceased.
8. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the Respondent/
original claimant supported the impugned Judgment and Award.
9. There is no dispute about the fact on 15/10/2021 an
accident occurred involving motorcycles bearing registration No.
MH-05-DD-3842 and MH-05-BT-1343. Owing to the injuries
caused in the said accident, the deceased died on 22/10/2021 is
also undisputed fact. The claimant No.1 examined herself and also
Page 3 of 5
th
6 January 2026
::: Uploaded on - 07/01/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 07/01/2026 20:41:12 :::
10-FA(ST)-31974-2025.DOC
placed reliance on the police papers including copy of charge-
sheet. The said documents indicate that charge-sheet came to be
filed against the rider of the offending motorcycle. There is
nothing on record to show that the rider of the said motorcycle
has challenged filling of charge-sheet against him. In absence of
any specific evidence led by the insurer to show negligence of
deceased, it is not possible to accept the contention with regard to
the contributory negligence on the part of the deceased in
occurrence of the accident.
10. As far the issue with regard to the breach of condition of
insurance policy is concerned, though the insurer examined the
witness, however, as rightly observed by the Tribunal that the
evidence of the said witness is not sufficient to prove the
contention of the insurer with regard to the non holding of valid
driving licence by driver of offending vehicle. It was open for the
insurer to examine the rider of the motorcycle to substantiate the
said claim. In absence of any such evidence, contention of the
Appellant deserves rejection.
11. With regard to the challenge to the quantum of
compensation, it is pertinent to note that the Tribunal has
accepted the Notional Income of the deceased at the rate of
Rs.15,000/- per month. Having regard to the fact that the
deceased was resident of Ulhasnagar with responsibility of four
members of the family, the Notional Income accepted by the
Tribunal at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per month is not excessive. The
Tribunal has correctly arrived at the compensation by applying the
Page 4 of 5
th
6 January 2026
::: Uploaded on - 07/01/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 07/01/2026 20:41:12 :::
10-FA(ST)-31974-2025.DOC
correct principles for calculation thereof, such as, age, income and
further prospects etc.
12. As a result of the above discussion, the Appeal sans merits.
13. In view of the above, I pass the following order:
ORDER
(a) The Appeal is dismissed.
(b) The Claimants are permitted to withdraw the
deposited amount along with accrued interest
thereon.
(c) The statutory amount be transmitted to the
Tribunal along with accrued interest thereon.
The parties are at liberty to withdraw it, as per
Rule.
(d) R & P be sent back to the Tribunal.
13. In view of dismissal of the Appeal, pending Applications, if
any, stand disposed of.
(R. M. JOSHI, J.)
{
th
6 January 2026
