Allowed

Nana@Dnyaneshwar Prabhat Patil v. Chandabai Anilkumar Lahriya and Anr.

Bombay HC22 Sept 2022FA/3281/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal seeking enhancement of compensation following a motorcycle accident. The Court awarded an additional Rs. 20,000/- over the Tribunal's sum, tailored the pain and suffering damages, and included specific amounts for transportation, directing the insurers to deposit the funds.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is allowed; the appellant is awarded an enhanced sum of Rs. 20,000/- @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing the petition, to be deposited by the respondents.

Nana@Dnyaneshwar Prabhat Patil Vs Chandabai Anilkumar Lahriya and… — Insurance | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

{1}

¶2

1041-FA-3281-2008

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

FIRST APPEAL NO. 3281 OF 2008

¶5

Nana @ Dnyaneshwar Prabhat Patil, Age : 38 years, Occu. : Agriculture & Business, R/o. : Dagadi-Subgavan, Tq. Parola, Dist. Jalgaon … APPELLANT

¶6

… APPELLANT (Ori. Petitioner)

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Chandabai Anilkumar Lahriya, Age : 38 years, Occu. : Truck owner, R/o. : Pragati Nagar, at and Post – Vani, Dist. Chandrapur

¶9

The New India Insurance Co. Ltd., Through it’s Divisional Manager, Khandesh Mill Shopping Complex, Dist. Jalgaon Aurangbad … RESPONDENTS (Ori. Respondents)

¶10

Mrs. M.L. Sangit h/f. Mr. L.V. Sangit : Advocate for Appellant Mr. V.R. Mundada : Advocate for Respondent No.2

¶11

CORAM : S.G. DIGE, J. DATE : 22^nd September, 2022

¶12

ORAL JUDGMENT :

¶13

. By this appeal appellant is seeking enhancement of

¶14

compensation.

¶15

Pooja K.

¶16

{2} 1041-FA-3281-2008

¶17

It is contention of learned Counsel for appellant that, appellant met with an accident on 11^th December, 2002 at about 05:30 p.m. on National Highway No.6, when he was going on motorcycle. His motorcycle bearing No.MH19-U-1968 was dashed by the truck bearing No.MP-9-K7844. He was admitted in hospital. Due to said accident appellant sustained 35% disability therefore, he is unable to do his daily work. The claim of appellant before the Tribunal was for amount of Rs.2,00,000/- but the Tribunal has awarded amount of Rs.1,30,800/- which is on lower side. Hence, this appeal for enhancement.

¶18

It is contention of learned Counsel for respondent No.2 that, the Tribunal has considered income of deceased at Rs.18,000/- per year. Multiplier is also applied by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has calculated the compensation on the basis of evidence led before the Tribunal. Hence, order passed by the Tribunal is legal and valid.

¶19

I have heard both the learned Counsel. Perused

Pooja K.

{3}

1041-FA-3281-2008

judgment and order passed by the Tribunal.

¶24

5. The Tribunal has granted the following compensation to the appellant :

¶25

Yearly income Compensation payable :	Rs.18,000 12,000 x 35 x 16 100	Rs.1,00,080
Non Pecuniary damages :
For Medical expenses : (supported by bills) For loss of income :	Rs.51,000 Rs.2,000
Pain and sufering :	Rs.2,000 Rs.55,000	Rs.55,000
Minus NFL amount :		Rs.1,55,800 Rs.25,000
Total		Rs.1,30,800

¶26

The Tribunal has awarded amount of Rs.2,000/-

¶27

towards pain and sufering. In my view, it is very less amount comparing 35% disability of the appellant. Hence, I am considering it as amount of Rs.15,000/-. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount for transportation. The appellant is resident of Dagadi Subgavan, Tq. Parola, Dist. Jalgaon. He was admitted in hospital at Jalgaon hence, I am considering amount of Rs.5,000/- as transportation.

Pooja K.

{4}

1041-FA-3281-2008

By this calculation appellant is entitled for enhanced amount of Rs.20,000/-. In view of the above, I pass the following order :-

¶32

ORDER

¶33

(a) Appeal is allowed.

¶34

(b) Appellant is entitled for enhanced amount of Rs.20,000/- @ 6% p.a. from the date of fling of petition till its realisation.

¶35

(c) Respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall jointly and severally deposit aforementioned amount before the Tribunal within a month, after receipt of this order.

¶36

(d) Appellant is permitted to withdraw deposited amount.

¶37

(e) Appeal is disposed of.

¶38

[S.G. DIGE, J.]

¶39

Pooja K.

Nana@Dnyaneshwar Prabhat Patil v. Chandabai Anilkumar Lahriya and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nana@Dnyaneshwar Prabhat Patil v. Chandabai Anilkumar Lahriya and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umakant Govindrao Gadgul Vs Balveer Ramdas Ramdasi

Sangitadevi Rameshwarkumar and Others. Vs Shaikh Nazir Shaikh Imam and Others.

Ramdas Rangnathrao Kakde Vs Balveer Ramdas Ramdasi

The Ex. Engineer, Mionr Irrigation Division No. 1 Aurangabad Thr Gmidc, Aurangabad Vs Kashinath Trimbak Karale and Anr.

The Ex. Engineer, Mionr Irrigation Division No. 1 Aurangabad Thr Gmidc, Aurangabad Vs Kashinath Trimbak Karale and Anr.

Laxmibai Waman Salunke and Ors. Vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors.