Disposed

United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Amravati Divisional Office through the Regional Manager v. Smt. Kumud Suryabhan Pohekar and Others

Bombay HC18 Dec 2015CAF/2880/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the appellant insurance company to withdraw 50% of the deposited compensation amount on furnishing solvent surety, directing the balance into fixed deposits.

What did the court decide?

Allow withdrawal of 50% of deposited amount upon furnishing solvent surety; balance to be deposited in fixed deposits.

What the court decided

United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Amravati Divisional Office through the Regional Manager Vs Smt. Kumud Suryabhan Pohekar and Others — Bombay HC (2015) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1/2

¶2

1812fa270.15.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATION (CAF) NO. 2880 OF 2015 IN

¶5

FIRST APPEAL NO. 270 OF 2015

¶6

(United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Kumud Suryabhan Pohekar & others)

¶7

- - - - -- - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri D. N. Kukday, Advocate for the appellant. Shri P.R. Agrawal, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

¶8

CORAM : B. R. GAVAI AND P. N. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATED : 18 DECEMBER, 2015

¶9

This is an application for withdrawal of amount deposited by the appellant in this Court in pursuance of the award passed by the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Amravati. Shri Kukday, learned Counsel for the appellant vehemently opposed the application. He submits that the policy, which was in favour of the State Bank of India, the employer of the deceased, only covers third party risk. He submits that it is in dispute that as to whether the deceased was driving the vehicle or he was a pillion rider. He submits that if the deceased was pillion rider, the claim of compensation would be tenable subject to other objections. He further submits that if the deceased himself was driving the vehicle, the policy would not cover the risk.

¶10

1812fa270.15.odt 2/2 Taking into consideration the rival contentions, we find that it will be in the interest of justice to allow the applicant to withdraw 50% of the amount deposited in this Court on his furnishing solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. The balance amount is directed to be deposited in the fixed deposits in any nationalized Bank. Civil Application is disposed of accordingly. JUDGE JUDGE

¶11

wwl

United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Amravati Divisional Office through the Regional Manager v. Smt. Kumud Suryabhan Pohekar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Amravati Divisional Office through the Regional Manager v. Smt. Kumud Suryabhan Pohekar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Living With Dignity Dying With Resepct, Nagpur Thr. Its Representative Ravindra Bhusari, Trustee, Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. the Chief Secretary

M/S Jaika Vanijya Limited, through Ita Authorized Signatory and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Department of Urban Development, Mumbai and Others

Mohan Apparao Jadhao Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Public Health, Mumbai and 2 Others

Sukhdeosingh S/O Preetamsingh Panesar Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Mumbai and Others

Sukhdeosingh S/O Preetamsingh Panesar Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Mumbai and Others

Sukhdeosingh S/O Preetamsingh Panesar Vs State of Maharashtra Thr.Its Secy and 3 Ors.