Allowed

Nivedita Rakesh Soni and Ors. v. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Bombay HC7 Feb 2023IA/1050/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed an interim application by applicants in a motor accident death claim. Permission granted to withdraw 50% of the deposited compensation along with interest upon furnishing an undertaking, citing the deceased's role as the sole income earner.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw 50% of deposited amount along with accrued interest upon furnishing undertaking.

Nivedita Rakesh Soni and Ors. Vs Bajaj Allianz General… — Motor Accident Claims | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

20-ia-1050-2023 in fa-824-2022.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1050 OF 2023 IN

¶4

FIRST APPEAL NO.824 OF 2022

¶5

Nivedita Rakesh Soni & Ors. ...Applicants Versus

¶6

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. ...Respondents

¶7

Digitally signed NILAM by NILAM SANTOSH SANTOSHKAMBLE KAMBLE Date: 2023.02.08 18:41:48 +0530

¶8

Mr.Amol Gatne i/b Ms.Swati Uday Mehta, for the Applicants. Mr.D.S. Joshi, for the Respondents.

¶9

CORAM : S.G. DIGE, J.

¶10

DATE : 7 FEBRUARY 2023

¶11

P.C:-

¶12

. Heard learned counsel for the Applicants and the learned counsel for the Respondents.

¶13

The learned counsel for the Applicants submit that the deceased was husband of Applicant No.1 and father of Applicant Nos.3 and 4 and the Applicant No.2 is mother of deceased. He further submit that the Accident took place on 30 September 2016 since then the Applicants have not received any compensation deceased was 38 years of age at the time of the Accident, he was self employed. The deceased was only earning member of the Applicants family, they have no source of income, they need the amount for daily expenses and paying school fees

¶14

N.S. Kamble page 1 of 2

¶15

20-ia-1050-2023 in fa-824-2022.doc

¶16

of Applicant Nos.3 and 4. Hence, requested to allow the Application.

¶17

The learned counsel for the Respondent- Appellant. submits that at the time of accident driver of the offending vehicle was not holding effective and valid license but this fact is not considered by the Tribunal. The learned counsel further submit that the exorbitant and excessive compensation is awarded without considering the evidence on record. Hence, requested to dismiss the Application.

¶18

I have heard both the counsel.

¶19

The deceased was only earning member of the Applicant’s family. The Applicants need amount for their daily expenses and paying school fees of Applicant Nos.3 and 4. Hence, I pass following order.

¶20

ORDER

¶21

(i) The Application is allowed. (ii) The Applicant’s are permitted to withdraw 50% amount along with accrued interest thereon out of the deposited amount on furnishing undertaking.

¶22

N.S. Kamble page 2 of 2

Nivedita Rakesh Soni and Ors. v. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nivedita Rakesh Soni and Ors. v. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd.

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

Smt. Bharti Sunil Shinde and Ors. Vs Divisional Manager ,New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,Nashik

Smt. Shahanj Harun Shaikh and Ors. Vs the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

Duryodhan Gujaba Savane and Anr. Vs the New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., Mumbai Vs Rashmi Jagdishwarnath Tripathi and Anr.

United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Mrs. Jennifer Alex Dsilva

Shriram General Insurance Company Limited Vs Smt.Mangal Apasaheb More and Ors.