Allowed

Deepak Ramlakhan Jaiswal v. Kamalakar N. Arekar and Anr.

Bombay HC28 Mar 2024FA/1736/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Motor accident claimant with 28% permanent physical disability sought enhancement of Rs.50,000 compensation. Relying on Master Mallikarjun (SC), the court held the award was on the lower side and enhanced compensation by Rs.2,50,000 with 7.5% interest.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of Rs.2,50,000 @ 7.5% interest p.a. from date of filing of claim petition till realisation; insurer to deposit within six weeks.

Deepak Ramlakhan Jaiswal Vs Kamalakar N. Arekar and Anr. — Motor Accident Claims | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

203-fa-1736-2010.doc

¶2

S.S.Kilaje

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

FIRST APPEAL NO. 1736 OF 2010

¶6

Mr. Deepak Ramlakhan Jaiswal
Age : 22 years, Occu : Student
Residing at Bhaipada, Santoshinagar, Boisar,
Tal-Palghare, Dist-Thane… Appellant

¶7

 Versus

¶8

1 Mr.Kamalakar N. Arekar

¶9

At Post Dhandi, Tal.- Palghar, Dist-Thane

¶10

2The United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
17, Star Trading Center, Mandepeshwar Road,
Borivali (W), Mumbai-92…Respondents

¶11

Mr. S.R.Chavanke, Advocate for the Appellant.

¶12

Mr. Nikhil Mehta i/b. KMC Legal Venture Advocate for Respondent No.2.

¶13

 CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
 DATE : 28th MARCH, 2024.

¶14

ORAL JUDGMENT :

¶15

1. By way of this appeal appellant/claimant is seeking
enhancement of compensation.

¶16

2.It is contention of learned counsel for the appellant/claimant
that at the time of accident claimant was 15 years old. Due to accidental
injuries he has suffered 28% permanent physical disability but the
Tribunal has awarded lumsum amount of Rs.50,000/- as compensation,
which is on lower side. Learned counsel further submitted that as per the

¶17

1/3

¶18

S.S.Kilaje203-fa-1736-2010.doc

¶19

view of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Master Mallikarjun V/s.
Divisonal Manager, the National Insurance Company Limited and Anr.,
reported in 2013 AIR SCW 6452, the claimant is entitled for Rs.3,00,000/-
hence requested to allow the appeal.

¶20

3.It is contention of learned counsel for the respondent
No.2/Insurance Company that claimant has suffered only fracture injuries.
The disability of the claimant is not proved before the Tribunal, the
Tribunal has considered all the aspects while passing Judgment and Order
hence no interference is required in it.

¶21

4.I have heard both the learned counsel. Perused the Judgment
and Order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Palghar (for
short “the Tribunal”). At the time of accident claimant was 15 years old,
due to accidental injuries the claimant has suffered 28% permanent
physical disability. To prove the disability the claimant has examined PW-
2 Dr. Charan Jadhav. He has stated that due to accidental injuries the
claimant has suffered 28% permanent physical disability. This witness was
not cross-examined by the respondent No.2/Insurance Company nor the
Insurance Company has challenged the disability of the claimant. The
Tribunal has awarded lumpsum amount of Rs.20,000/- for medical
expenses and Rs.30,000/- for pain and suffering. In my view, it is on
lower side. As per view of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Master

¶22

2/3

¶23

203-fa-1736-2010.doc

¶24

S.S.Kilaje

¶25

Mallikarjun (supra), the claimant is entitled for Rs.3,00,000/- as
compensation for 28% permanent physical disability. As the claimant has
received Rs.50,000/-, after deducting this amount, the claimant is entitled
for Rs.2,50,000/- as compensation under all head and I pass following
order.

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

i. The appeal is allowed.

¶28

ii.The appellant /claimant is entitled for enhanced
amount of Rs.2,50,000/- @ 7.5% interest per annum
from the date of filing of claim petition till realisation
of the amount.

¶29

iii. The respondent No.2-Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced amount along with interest within six weeks after receipt of the order.

¶30

iv. The claimant is permitted to withdraw the enhanced amount deposited by the Respondent No.2-Insurance company along with accrued interest thereon.

¶31

v. The appellant/claimant shall pay the deficit Court fees on enhanced amount as per rule.

¶32

5. The appeal is disposed of. Record and Proceeding be sent back.

¶33

 (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

¶34

3/3

¶35

SONALISATISHKILAJE Digitally signedby SONALISATISH KILAJEDate:2024.04.1518:25:06+0530

Deepak Ramlakhan Jaiswal v. Kamalakar N. Arekar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Ramlakhan Jaiswal v. Kamalakar N. Arekar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Reliance General Insurance Company Limited through Its Manager Legal Mr. Priyank Shah Vs Smt. Dipti Nitin Sankpal and Ors.

Yogesh @ Nunya Shashikant Pawar Vs State of Maharashtra

Reliance General Insurance Company Limited Vs Kum. Shubham Dilip Kamble through Smt. Dipali Kamble on Behalf of Petitioner as a Natural Guardian

Mr. Bhivaji Bhagwat Chopade and Anr. vs Mr. Rajaram Jijaba Nalawade and Ors.

Sou.Kamal Vishnu Shendge vs Shri.Sayyad Dastagir Honmurgi and Ors.

Mr. Bhivaji Bhagwat Chopade and Anr. vs Mr. Rajaram Jijaba Nalawade and Ors.