Allowed

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Ushakumari Brijkumar Yadav and Ors.

Bombay HC9 Feb 2024FA/396/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Insurance company appealed a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal compensation award, contesting personal expense deduction, future prospects percentage and consortium amount. The High Court recomputed compensation at Rs.17,94,372/- against the awarded Rs.21,50,500/- and allowed the insurer to withdraw the excess of Rs.3,56,128/-.

What did the court decide?

Appellant permitted to withdraw excess amount of Rs.3,56,128 with proportionate interest; claimants to withdraw balance; statutory amount transmitted to tribunal.

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Ushakumari… — Motor Accident Claims | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

309-FA-396-2017.doc

¶2

Shantanu Dhudum

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION

¶4

FIRST APPEAL NO. 396 OF 2017

¶5

Digitally signed by SHANTANU SHANTANUSHANKARSADHUDUM SHANKARSADHUDUMDate:2024.02.23 10:43:55 +0530

¶6

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.)
Nikunj signature, 3rd Floor,)
Above Corporation Bank, Manav Mandir Road)
Tal. Vasai, Dist: Thane)
Insurer of Trailer No. MH-06-K-6521)
Vide Policy No.14080031110100000472)
Valid from 24.04.2011 to 20.04.2012)
….Appellant
 (Orig. Insurer)
 Versus
1. Ushakumari Brijkumar Yadav)
 Age: 25 years, Occ: Household )
2. Mr. Ramchandra Sarju Yadav)
 Age: 52 years, Occ: Labourer)
3. Sharadadevi Ramchandra Yadav)
 Age: 50 years, Occ: Household)
 All R/at Gram Mogalpur, Post – Sonbhad)
 Thane Karpi, Dist. Arval)
 State Bihar)
4. Mr. Swaraj Singh Gurbux Singh Maniktala)
 At Godown No. 126, Truck Terminal,)
 Near Libra, Kalamboli, Tal. Panvel,)
 Dist. Raigad 410 218)
….Respondents
 (Owner of the Trailer No. MH-06-K-6521)
 (Res. Nos. 1 to 3 = Orig. Applicants and
 Respondent No.4 = Opp. Party.)

¶7

1/5

¶8

309-FA-396-2017.doc

¶9

Shantanu Dhudum

¶10

Mr. Himanshu Takke i/b Mr. Milind V. More, Advocate for the
Appellant.

¶11

Mr. Shirshak Chavanke, Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

¶12

 CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

¶13

 DATE : 9th FEBRUARY, 2024.

¶14

Oral Judgment. :

¶15

1.The issue involved in this appeal is deduction of amount for

¶16

personal expenses and consortium amount is awarded on higher side.

¶17

2. It is contention of learned counsel for the

¶18

Appellant/Insurance Company that there are 3 Claimants but Tribunal
has deducted 1/4 amount for personal expenses, it should be 1/3
amount. Learned counsel further submitted that the Tribunal has
awarded 50% future prospects, it should be 40%. Learned counsel
further submitted that the Tribunal has awarded Rs.2,05,000/- as
consortium amount, which is on higher side. Hence, requested to
allow the Appeal.

¶19

2/5

¶20

309-FA-396-2017.doc

¶21

Shantanu Dhudum

¶22

3. Learned counsel for the Respondents/Claimants submitted
that while passing order, the Tribunal has considered all the aspects
and on that basis, the judgment and order is passed and no
interference is required in it.

¶23

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

¶24

5. The deceased was driver on private vehicle. The Tribunal has awarded 50% future prospects, it should be 40%. Hence, I am considering 40% future prospects. There are three claimants, the Tribunal has deducted 1/4 amount for personal expenses, it should be 1/3 hence, I am considering 1/3 amount for personal expenses. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.2,05,000/- under non pecuniary head. As per the view of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Magma General

¶25

Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Nanu Ram, 2018 ACJ 2782 (SC) , each claimant is entitled for Rs.48,000/- as consortium amount and Rs.18,000/- for funeral expenses and Rs.18,000 for loss of estate.

¶26

3/5

¶27

309-FA-396-2017.doc

¶28

Shantanu Dhudum

¶29

6. Considering above calculations, the Claimants are entitled

¶30

for following compensation.

¶31

MonthlySalary	Rs.8,000/-
Add: 40% futureprospects	Rs.3,200/-
Sub total	Rs.11,200/-
Less 1/3rd towardspersonal expenses	Rs.3,733/-
Total monthlyincome	Rs.7,467/-
Annual Income(Rs.7,467/- X 12)	Rs.89,604/-
Multiplier 18(Rs.89,604/- X 18)	Rs.16,12,872/-
Loss of estate	Rs.18,000/-
Funeral Expenses	Rs.18,000/-
Consortium amount (Rs.48,000/- X 3 claimants)	Rs.1,44,000/-
Medical Expenses	Rs.1,500/-
Total Compensation	Rs.17,94,372/-
Less awarded bythe Tribunal	Rs.21,50,500/-
Balance amount refundable to appellant	Rs.3,56,128/-

¶32

The excess amount is Rs.3,56,128/-, the Appellant/Insurance
Company is entitled for this amount.

¶33

7. In view of above, I pass following order.

¶34

ORDER

¶35

i. Appeal is allowed.

¶36

ii. The appellant/insurance company is permitted to

¶37

withdraw Rs.3,56,128 with proportionate

¶38

4/5

¶39

309-FA-396-2017.doc

¶40

Shantanu Dhudum

¶41

interest, out of deposited amount.

¶42

iii. The claimants are permitted to withdraw the

¶43

balance amount along with proportionate interest

¶44

thereon.

¶45

iv. The statutory amount be transmitted to the tribunal

¶46

along with accrued interest thereon. The parties

¶47

are at liberty to withdraw it, as per Rule.

¶48

8. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶49

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

¶50

5/5

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Ushakumari Brijkumar Yadav and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Ushakumari Brijkumar Yadav and Ors.

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

Milind Shrikrishna Vaidya Vs Suhas Ramchandra Vaidya and Anr.

The New India Insurance Co. Ltd. Pune Vs Ranjana Tukaram Konapure and Ors.

Smt. Tasneem D/O Akhtar Bhopalwala Vs Mr. Abhijeet S/O Dayandeo Thorat and Ors.

Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, Thane Vs Ramkrishna Chintaman Kane and Ors.

Smt Maimuna Wd/O Akhtar Bhopalwala Vs Mr. Abhijeet S/O Dayandeo Thorat and Ors.

The New India Assurance Company Limited through Its Divisional Manager Vs Smt. Raissa Iqbal Maniyar and Ors.