Allowed

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sudha Kailash Chavhan and Ors.

Bombay HC18 Dec 2013FA/3052/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appellant to withdraw the deposited amount while the Tribunal was remitted to pass further orders under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act regarding the involved vehicle and compensation.

What did the court decide?

Appellant allowed to withdraw deposited amount pending decision under Section 166; Tribunal directed to dispose proceedings within one year.

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sudha… — Motor Accident Claims | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

F.A.No.3052/13

¶3

 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

 APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶6

FIRST APPEAL NO.3052 OF 2013

¶7

Office Notes, Office
Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's
orders or directions
andRegistrar's
orders.

¶8

Court's or Judge's orders

¶9

Mr.S.G.Chapalgaonkar, advocate for the appellant.
Mr.G.J.Pahilwan, advocate holding for Mr.R.V.Gore,
advocate for the Respondent Nos.4 and 5.

¶10

 CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.

¶11

 Date : 18.12.2013.

¶12

PER COURT :

¶13

Heard.

¶14

The appeal arises out of an award passed U/s 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The learned counsel for the appellant states that involvement of the vehicle itself is disputed. The FIR is lodged against an unknown vehicle. After two months, the statements of the alleged eye witnesses are recorded and the vehicle insured by the appellant is shown as involved in the accident. There is no evidence to show the involvement of the vehicle. No award could have been passed U/s 140 of the M.V.Act.

¶15

The learned counsel for the Respondents supports the award and submits that at this stage detailed inquiry is not contemplated.

¶16

¶17

F.A.No.3052/13

¶18

The police papers show involvement of the vehicle in the accident. The award is rightly passed.

¶19

No doubt, at the time of determination of an application U/s 140 of the M.V.Act, long drawn inquiry is not contemplated. Prima facie facts are required to be considered. Whether really the vehicle in question is involved in the accident or not can be determined after the parties have adduced their evidence. At this stage, no specific finding can given about the involvement or otherwise of the vehicle in question. In light of the above, it would not be appropriate to dilate on the merits of the matter. Interest of justice would be sub-served by passing the following order :

¶20

(a) The claimants are allowed to withdraw the amount deposited by the appellant on furnishing solvent security or surety of like amount. The said withdrawal shall be subject to the decision of the Court in proceedings U/s 166 of the M.V.Act.

¶21

(b) The Court shall pass further orders with regard to the amount U/s 140 of the M.V.Act in consonance with the judgment delivered U/s 166 of the said Act.

¶22

(c) The Tribunal shall endeavour to dispose of the proceedings U/s 166 of the M.V.Act, expeditiously and preferably within one year.

¶23

(d) The First Appeal accordingly disposed of.

¶24

¶25

F.A.No.3052/13

¶26

(e) The Civil Application is also disposed of.

¶27

(S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.)

¶28

Dt.18.12.2013. asp/office/fa3052.13

¶29

¶30

F.A.No.3052/13

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sudha Kailash Chavhan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sudha Kailash Chavhan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Mah and Ors. Vs Dhondiba Eknath Kajale

Savita Balkrushna @ Anil Kulkarni and Ors. Vs Waman Sopan Shitre and Anr.

Suresh Babulal Gavande Vs the Chief Officer, Nandurbar Nagar Parishad and Anr.

The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Dept. Zp, Ahmednagar Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Ramesh Bhaskar Patil Vs Sumanbai Chandanmal Rathi

M/S National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sharda Chandrakant Bidave and Ors.