Disposed

Reliance General Insurance Co., Insurance Company of Bajaj Platina, Branch Manager, Nagpur v. Pramila W/O Vijay Raut and Others

Bombay HC2 Jan 2024CAF/2343/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Insurance company's appeal filed with a 44-day delay. The court condoned the delay citing internal administrative compliance, admitted the appeal, and allowed respondents to withdraw 90% of the decreetal deposit, partly on undertaking and partly on solvent surety.

What did the court decide?

44-day delay condoned; appeal admitted; respondents allowed to withdraw 90% of decreetal deposit (60% on undertaking, 30% on solvent surety).

Reliance General Insurance Co., Insurance Company of… — Motor Accident Claims | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:54

¶2

1 14.CAF.2343.2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2343 OF 2022 IN FIRST APPEAL (St.) NO. 11146 OF 2022 Reliance General Insurance Co., Nagpur .VS. Pramila Vijay Raut and others

¶5

_______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders.

¶6

Mr Amit Kukday, Advocate for the appellant None for the respondents

¶7

CORAM : G.A. SANAP, J. DATE : JANUARY 02, 2024.

¶8

Heard.

¶9

This is an application for condonation of 44 days delay caused in filing this appeal. The reasons have been stated in the application. It is stated that the appellant is an insurance company. On account of the procedural formalities the delay has occurred. On going through the application I am satisfied that the delay has occurred due to internal official compliance on administrative side. In view of the reasons, I am of the view that case is made out for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

¶10

2 14.CAF.2343.2022

¶11

The delay of 44 days caused in filing the appeal is condoned.

¶12

The application stands disposed of, accordingly.

¶13

The appeal be registered.

¶14

FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 11146 OF 2022

¶15

Heard.

¶16

ADMIT.

¶17

Learned Advocate for the appellant on registration of the appeal shall provide the copy of the appeal memo to the learned Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

¶18

Call for record and proceedings.

¶19

Paper book be filed within six weeks from the date of receipt of record and proceedings.

¶20

CIVIL APPLICATION (CAF) NO. 3471 OF 2023

¶21

Heard learned Advocate for the appellant. Learned Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 is absent.

¶22

This is an application for withdrawal of the decreetal amount deposited in this Court in terms of order of this Court. Learned Advocate for the appellant submits that subject to appropriate security the respondents may be allowed to withdraw some amount.

¶23

3 14.CAF.2343.2022

¶24

In view of the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed. The respondents are allowed to withdraw 90 % of the decreetal amount deposited in this Court. Out of which 60% amount is allowed to be withdrawn on furnishing usual undertaking to the effect that they will return the entire amount in case the appeal is decided against them alongwith interest, as directed by this Court and 30% amount is allowed to be withdrawn on furnishing solvent surety.

¶25

The application stands disposed of , accordingly.

¶26

(G. A. SANAP, J.)

¶27

Namrata

Reliance General Insurance Co., Insurance Company of Bajaj Platina, Branch Manager, Nagpur v. Pramila W/O Vijay Raut and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reliance General Insurance Co., Insurance Company of Bajaj Platina, Branch Manager, Nagpur v. Pramila W/O Vijay Raut and Others

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

Vishal Vinay Tamotiya Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vinod Banhayalal Trivedi @ Vinod Kanhayalal Trivedi Vs State of Maharashtra

Javed Abdul Karim Shaikh Vs State of Maharashtra

The Executive Engineer, Upper Painganga Project Division, Umarkhed, Yavatmal Vs Ashok Lingoji Shewalkar and Others

V.I.D.C. Thr. Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Department-Ii, Karanja, Washim Vs Sanjay Vishwasrao Boche and Others

Raunak Umesh @ Guddu Paliwal vs the State of Maharashtra through Pso Tahsil Ps Tahsil Nanga Putla Chowk Gandhibag Nagpur