Allowed

Icici Lombard Gic Ltd. v. Changuna Ramdas Ranasing and Ors.

Bombay HC15 Feb 2022IA/2955/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The high court disposed of two interim applications. IA 2955 stayed the appeal pending disposal and accepted deposit of the entire amount. IA 650 allowed withdrawal of 50% compensation due to a respondent's death, directed fresh apportionment by the MACT, and handled transfer of deposited amounts.

What did the court decide?

IA 2955 stayed appeal; IA 650 allowed withdrawal of 50% compensation; fresh apportionment directed; statutory deposit transferred to MACT Mumbai.

Icici Lombard Gic Ltd. Vs Changuna Ramdas Ranasing and… — Motor Accident Claims | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

13-IA-2955-2020.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2955 of 2020

¶4

IN

¶5

FIRST APPEAL NO. 609 OF 2021

¶6

ICICI Lombard GIC Limited… Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Changuna Ramdas Ranasingh and Ors.… Respondents

¶9

WITH

¶10

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 650 OF 2022

¶11

IN

¶12

FIRST APPEAL NO. 609 OF 2021

¶13

Changuna Ramdas Ranasingh and Ors. …Applicants
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN

¶14

ICICI Lombard GIC Limited… Appellant

¶15

Versus
Changuna Ramdas Ranasingh and Ors.… Respondents

¶16

Ms. Varsha Chavan, for the Appellant.

¶17

Mr. Yogesh Pande, for the Respondents and Applicants in IA 650 of 2022.

¶18

CORAM : V. G. BISHT, J.

¶19

 DATE : 15th FEBRUARY, 2022.

¶20

PC:

¶21

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2955 of 2020

¶22

Learned Counsel for the applicant/appellant makes a statement
that entire amount along with interest has been deposited. Learned
Counsel for respondents has no objection to stay the Appeal.

¶23

REKHA PRAKASH PATIL

¶24

Digitally signed by REKHA PRAKASH PATIL Date: 2022.02.15 15:45:49 +0530

¶25

Rekha Patil 1/3

¶26

2In view of above, impugned judgment and order date 18th
September, 2019 passed by learned Member, MACT, Pune in Motor
Accident Claim Petition No. 701 of 2015 is stayed until the disposal of
Appeal.

¶27

3 Interim Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶28

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 650 OF 2022

¶29

Not on board. Taken on board.

¶30

2Learned Counsel for applicants states that respondent No.5 died
during the pendency of the proceeding and therefore, he request that
her name be deleted.

¶31

3Learned Counsel for appellant is directed to delete the name of
Respondent No. 5. Amendment be carried out accordingly.

¶32

4The Applicants have moved the application for withdrawal of
amount deposited by the original appellant pursuant to the judgment
and order dated 18th September, 2019 passed by the learned Member,
MACT, Pune in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 701 of 2015.

¶33

5 Heard learned counsel for both the parties.

¶34

6 Learned Counsel for the respondents submits that respondent No. 5-Hirabaee Dattatray Ranasing is dead and since the apportionment of the claim amount was made by learned Member, MACT, Pune in the

¶35

Rekha Patil 2/3

¶36

impugned judgment and order, in view of death of respondent No.5, a
fresh apportionment will have to be made out.

¶37

7In view of submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants,
applicants are allowed to withdraw 50% of the compensation amount.
However, the learned Member MACT is directed to make a fresh
apportionment of the amount of award in view of the death of
respondent No.5. The applicants are directed to give an undertaking of
returning the said amount to be withdrawn in the event of appeal being
allowed with prevailing rate of interest.

¶38

8The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited in this Court at the
time of filing of Appeal shall be transferred to the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Mumbai. Rest of the amount to be deposited in the
nationalized bank.

¶39

9 Interim Application is allowed and accordingly disposed of.

¶40

 (V. G. BISHT, J.)

¶41

Rekha Patil 3/3

Icici Lombard Gic Ltd. v. Changuna Ramdas Ranasing and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Lombard Gic Ltd. v. Changuna Ramdas Ranasing and Ors.

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

Sanjay Mishrimal Punamiya Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vinayak Pandharinath Paygude and Ors. Vs Bajirao Kashinath Paygude and Ors.

Vinayak Pandharinath Paygude and Ors. Vs Bajirao Kashinath Paygude and Ors.

Changuna Ramdas Ranasing and Ors. Vs Icici Lombard Gic Ltd. Mumbai.

Satish Jadeshwar Dave Vs Renuka D/O. Jadeshwar Dave and Ors.

Satish Jadeshwar Dave Vs Renuka D/O. Jadeshwar Dave and Ors.