Allowed

United India Insurance Co.Ltd.through Its Regional Manager v. Mr. Bhimrao Malhari Kamble and Ors.

Bombay HC18 Jan 2024FA/25/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Insurance company appealed against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award, contending that as the deceased was a bachelor, one-half and not one-third should have been deducted for personal expenses. The court recalculated compensation downward by Rs.5,62,000 and allowed withdrawal of that excess.

What did the court decide?

Appellant allowed to withdraw excess Rs.5,62,000 plus accrued interest from deposit; claimants may withdraw balance; statutory amount transmitted to Tribunal.

United India Insurance Co.Ltd.through Its Regional… — Motor Accident Claims | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

36-FA-25-2024(J).doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION

¶4

FIRST APPEAL NO. 25 OF 2024

¶5

SHANTANUSHANKARSA Digitallysigned bySHANTANUSHANKARSADHUDUM DHUDUM Date:2024.12.1810:23:28+0530

¶6

United India Insurance Company Limited	]
Branch Office – Matoshri Plaza, Office,	]
No.301, 3^rdFloor, Venus Corner,	]
Shahpuri, Kolhapur.	]
Through it’s Regional Manager,	]
United India Insurance Company Limited,	]
Mumbai Regional Office-II, T.P. Hub, 4^thFloor, Union Co-op Insurance Building, Sir P.M. Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001.	] ] ] ….	Appellant (Original Opponent No.2).
Versus
1. Bhimrao Malhari Kamble	]
Aged 62 years, Occ:- Labourer	]
2. Anjana Bhimrao Kamble Aged – 46 Years, Occu- Housewife	] ]
3. Anita Bhimrao Kamble	]
Aged – 35 years, Occu-Education	]
Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 all R/o:- Balinga, Tal:- Karveer, District:- Kolhapur.	] ]
4. Rajendra Shivaji Nale	]
Age- Major, Occ-Business	]
R/o. 112, Krantising Nana Patil Nagar, Phulewadi Ring Road, Kolhapur.	] ]
5. Manohar Rangrao Patil	]

¶7

Shantanu Dhudum 1/4

¶8

36-FA-25-2024(J).doc

¶9

Age- 40 Years, Occ- Driver	]
R/o., Padali Khurd, Tal. Karveer,	]
District:- Kolhapur.	]
6. Dilip Bhikaji Phondake	]
Age Major, Occ-Owner of the Tata Truck	]
R/o. Asalade, Tal. Kankavali,	]
District:- Sindhudurg	]
7. Oriental Insurance Company Limited Office:- 16 Chintamani Park,	] ]
Ground Floor, Opp. Gango Tample,	]
Mumbai-Goa Highway, Kankavali,	]
Tal:- Kankavali, District:- Sindhudurg	]
Branch Officer:-204/E, Kanchanjanga, Opp. Panchshil Hotel, Station Road, S. T. Stand, Kolhapur.	] ] ]
8. Deepak Babaji Ghugare	]
Age: Major, Occ: Driver,	]
R/o. Darum Bhogalewadi,	]
Tal:- Kankavali, District: Sindhudurg.	] …. Respondents

¶10

Adv. Amol Gatne, for the Appellant. Adv. Pritesh K. Bohade, for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. Adv. S. S. Dwivedi, for Respondent No.7.

¶11

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 6^th DECEMBER, 2024.

¶12

ORAL JUDGMENT :

¶13

The issue involved in this appeal is deduction of the

¶14

amount for personal expenses.

¶15

Shantanu Dhudum 2/4

¶16

36-FA-25-2024(J).doc

¶17

It is contention of learned counsel for the Appellant that at

¶18

the time of accident deceased was bachelor. The Tribunal has deducted 1/3 amount for personal expenses, it should be 1/2 amount. Hence, requested to allow the Appeal.

¶19

It is contention of learned counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 that he has no objection for deduction 1/2 amount for personal expenses.

¶20

I have heard both learned counsel. Perused judgment and order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kolhapur (for short “the Tribunal”).

¶21

While calculating the compensation, the Tribunal deducted

¶22

1/3 amount for personal expenses. However, at the time of the accident, the deceased was a bachelor, therefore, the Tribunal should have considered 1/2 amount for personal expenses instead of 1/3. The Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.23,96,400/-. If

¶23

1/2 of the amount is deducted for personal expenses instead of 1/3, the total compensation comes to Rs. 18,34,400/-. The excess amount comes to Rs.5,62,000/-.

¶24

In view of the above calculations, the Appellant/Insurance Company entitled for excess amount.

¶25

Shantanu Dhudum 3/4

¶26

36-FA-25-2024(J).doc

¶27

In view of above, I pass following order:

¶28

ORDER

¶29

i. Appeal is allowed.

¶30

ii. The Appellant is permitted to withdraw the excess amount of Rs.5,62,000/- from deposited amount along with accrued interest thereon.

¶31

iii. The Claimants are permitted to withdraw rest of the amount along with accrued interest thereon.

¶32

iv. The statutory amount be transmitted to the Tribunal. The parties are at liberty to withdraw it, as per Rule.

¶33

v. Record and Proceedings be sent back to the Tribunal.

¶34

All pending applications, if any, stands disposed of.

¶35

( SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

¶36

4/4

¶37

Shantanu Dhudum

United India Insurance Co.Ltd.through Its Regional Manager v. Mr. Bhimrao Malhari Kamble and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

United India Insurance Co.Ltd.through Its Regional Manager v. Mr. Bhimrao Malhari Kamble and Ors.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sau. Ashwini Satish Shinde Vs Mr. Satish Shivaji Shinde and Ors.

The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd.through Motor Thiird Party Claim Hub Vs Mr. Sudhir Kashinath Dewte and Anr.

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd..(through Manager) Vs Shweta Subhash Chalke and Anr.

Shri. Nilesh Pramod Shendurnikar Vs National Insurance Co.Ltd. Pune Divisional Office III through Mumbai Regional Office-Ii and Anr.

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Subhash Pandurang Lad and Ors.

Mrs. Sultana Salim Inamdar and Ors. vs Mr. Rajendra Laxmansing Rajput and Anr.