Allowed

Riya Kailash Udasi and Ors. v. Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, Kolhapur

Bombay HC11 Dec 2023IA/3718/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an interim application, the High Court allowed the applicants, a family dependent on a deceased sole earner, to withdraw 50% of the amount deposited by the insurance company along with accrued interest upon furnishing an undertaking, deferring other issues for the final hearing.

What did the court decide?

Permitted withdrawal of 50% of the deposited amount alongwith accrued interest on furnishing undertaking.

Riya Kailash Udasi and Ors. Vs Icici Lombard General… — Intellectual Property | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

47_fast_3847_2023.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3718 OF 2023

¶4

IN

¶5

FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO.3847 OF 2023

¶6

Smt. Riya Kailash Udasi and Ors.

¶7

...Applicants

¶8

Versus

¶9

ICICI Lombard General Insurance
Company Limited

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

Mr. Bhushan Walimbe for the Applicants in IA/3718/2023 and for
the Respondents in FAST/3847/2023.
Ms Varsha Chavan for the Appellant-Insurance Company.

¶12

 CORAM: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

¶13

 DATE : 11th DECEMBER, 2023.

¶14

P.C.:-

¶15

1.This is an application for withdrawal of the amount

¶16

deposited by the Appellant-Insurance Company.

¶17

2.It is the contention of the learned counsel for the

¶18

Applicants that the deceased was the sole earning member of the
Applicants’ family. They have no source of income. They need the

¶19

amount for their daily expenses. Hence, the Applicants requested to
allow the application.

¶20

Digitally signed by MEGHA MEGHA SHREEDHAR SHREEDHAR PARAB PARAB Date: 2023.12.1316:47:12 +0530 3. It is the contention of learned counsel for the Appellant-

¶21

Megha

¶22

1/2

¶23

47_fast_3847_2023.doc

¶24

Insurance Company that the Appellants have raised the issue before
the Tribunal that there was non-involvement of the vehicle, there
was contributory negligence on the part of the deceased and income
of the deceased is considered on higher side. It is further stated that
all these facts are not considered by the Tribunal, hence she has
requested to reject the application.

¶25

4. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

¶26

5. The deceased was sole earning member of the family.

¶27

The Applicants have no source of income. They need money for
their daily expenses. The issues raised by the learned counsel for the
Insurance Company can be considered at the time of final hearing of
the appeal. Hence, I pass following order:-

¶28

(i) The application is allowed.

¶29

(ii) The Applicants are permitted to withdraw 50%

¶30

amount out of the deposited amount alongwith

¶31

accrued interest thereon on furnishing
undertaking.

¶32

6.The application stands disposed of.

¶33

Megha

¶34

2/2

Riya Kailash Udasi and Ors. v. Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, Kolhapur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Riya Kailash Udasi and Ors. v. Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, Kolhapur

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

The New India Assurance Co.Ltd.Thr.Mumbai Legal Hub Vs Mr.Ramesh Shankarlal Bhanushali and Anr.

Reliance General Insurance Company Limited vs Smt Shobha Krishnat Shinge and Ors.

Reliance General Insurance Company Limited vs Smt Shobha Krishnat Shinge and Ors.

Reliance General Insurance Company Limited Vs Hunkar Sakharam Mohite and Ors.

Dinkar Rajaram Patil Vs Commissioner, Kolhapur Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Mrs. Chayya Gangadhar Bhosale and Ors. Vs Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. through Its Manager Mr. Amit Ashwini Sharma