Allowed

Harshada Rakesh Bhadrike and Ors. v. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Thr. Divisional Controller, Raigad

Bombay HC5 Dec 2023IA/13504/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an interim application concerning motor accident compensation, the Court allowed the applicants to withdraw 50% of the deposited amount along with accrued interest, noting the deceased was the sole earner and reserving final arguments.

What did the court decide?

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

Harshada Rakesh Bhadrike and Ors. Vs Maharashtra State… — Motor Accident Claims | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

34-ia-13504-2023-fast-20545-2022.doc

¶2

Shubhada S Kadam

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.13504 OF 2023

¶4

¶5

FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 20545 OF 2022

¶6

Harshada Rakesh Bhadrike and ors. ….Applicants In the matter of Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation through Divisional Controller, Raigad ….Appellant Versus Harshada Rakesh Bhadrike and ors. ….Respondents

¶7

Mr. Sandeep Shinde i/b. Ergo Juris, Advocates for Applicants/ Respondent Nos.1 to 5.

¶8

Mr. Dhananjayrao D. Rananaware, Advocate for the Appellant.

¶9

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

¶10

DATE : 5^th DECEMBER, 2023.

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for appellant-Corporation.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the deceased was the sole earning member of the applicants’ family. The applicants have no source of income. Applicant No.1 is housewife and applicant Nos.2 and 3 are daughters of applicant No.1. Applicants need the amount for their daily expenses and education of applicant Nos.2 and

¶14

Hence, requested to allow the application.

¶15

1/2

¶16

Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHUBHADA SHANKAR SHANKAR KADAM KADAM Date: 2023.12.07 11:31:22 +0530

¶17

34-ia-13504-2023-fast-20545-2022.doc

¶18

Shubhada S Kadam

¶19

Learned counsel for appellant-Corporation objected to allow the application on the ground that accident had occurred due to sole negligence of the deceased, he was under the influence of liquor but this fact is not considered by the Tribunal and has awarded exorbitant compensation. Hence, requested to dismiss the application.

¶20

I have heard both learned counsel. The deceased was the sole earning member of the applicants’ family. The applicants have no source of income. They need the amount for their daily expenses. The grounds raised by the appellant-Corporation can be considered at the time of final hearing of the appeal. Hence, I pass the following order :

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The application is allowed.

¶23

The applicants are permitted to withdraw 50% amount along with accrued interest therein, out of the deposited amount, on furnishing usual undertaking.

¶24

The application is disposed of.

¶25

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

¶26

2/2

Harshada Rakesh Bhadrike and Ors. v. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Thr. Divisional Controller, Raigad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harshada Rakesh Bhadrike and Ors. v. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Thr. Divisional Controller, Raigad

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

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Reshma Dilip Gaikar and Othrs

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Reshma Dilip Gaikar and Othrs

Bajaj Allianz General Insuranc Company Ltd. Vs Smt. Mangal Mahadeo Salunkhe and Ors.

The Union of India vs K.K.Mutatkar and Ors.

Shri. Pappu Gangaram Yadav and Anr. Vs Mr. Nandankumar Kailash Jha and Ors.

Future Generali India Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Smt.Sarika Ramdas Dhebe and Ors.