Partly allowed

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

Bombay HC9 Feb 2024FA/864/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this civil appeal regarding a motor accident claim, the High Court enhanced the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The court found the existing award of Rs.1,90,726/ to be on the lower side and granted an additional Rs.75,000/- across all heads of compensation.

What did the court decide?

Additional compensation of Rs.75,000/- awarded with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of filing the claim petition until realization.

Smt Maimuna Wd/O Akhtar Bhopalwala Vs Mr. Abhijeet S/O… — Motor Accident Claims | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

269-FA-864-2019.doc

¶2

Shantanu Dhudum

¶3

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

¶4

FIRST APPEAL NO. 864 OF 2019

¶5

Digitally signed by SHANTANU SHANTANU SHANKARSA SHANKARSA DHUDUM DHUDUM Date: 2024.03.01 09:25:05 +0530

¶6

Maimuna Wd/o Akhtar Bhopalwala)
Age: 50 years, Occ: Housewife)
An adult of Indian Inhabitant)
Residing at Room No.6, 1st Floor)
Vikram Building, Opp. Sheetal)
Cinema Kurla, Mumbai – 400070)….Appellant
 (Orig. Applicant)

¶7

 Versus
1. Abhijeet S/o Dayandeo Thorat)
Age about 27 years,)
Occ: Driver, R/o Baban Chwal)
 Room No.1, Ravalpada,)
 Shankarwadi, Dahisar (E),)
 Mumbai.)

¶8

2. Popat S/o Maruti Desai)Amendment
Age about 45 years)carried out as
Occ: Business /Owner) per order
of BoleroJeep No. MH-04-CJ)dated 14th Nov.
380 R/o Room No.4,)2014 passed in
Shankarwadi Awalpada,)Civil App. No.
Near Jame High School,)2933 of 2014
 Dahisar (E) Mumbai)1/11/2014
At present: Pandurant)
Apartment)
Plot No.203, Mahesh Park,)Res. Nos. 1 & 2
Tulinj Road, Nalasopara (E),)(Orig. Opp.
Thane)Party Nos.1 &2

¶9

3. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.)
 Through its Branch Manager,)

¶10

1/5

¶11

269-FA-864-2019.doc

¶12

Shantanu Dhudum

¶13

 Jeevan Seva, 2nd Floor,)
 Santacruz (W), Mumbai -)
 400054) R. No. 3
 (Insurer)
….Respondents

¶14

Mr. Sajid Shamim a/w Mr. Jishan Ansari i/b S. Shamim & Co.
Advocate for the Appellant.
Mr. S. M. Dange, Advocate for the Respondent No.3.

¶15

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

¶16

DATE : 9^th FEBRUARY, 2024.

¶17

Oral Judgment. :

¶18

1.By way of this appeal, the claimant is seeking enhancement

¶19

of compensation.

¶20

2. It is contention of learned counsel for the

¶21

appellant/claimant that due to accidental injuries, the claimant has
suffered 45% permanent physical disability but, this fact is not
considered by the tribunal. Learned counsel further submitted that the
claimant was doing garment business and she was earning Rs.3,000/-
per month but, this fact not considered by the tribunal, while
awarding compensation. Learned counsel further submitted that the
tribunal has not awarded future prospects, it be awarded. Hence,

¶22

2/5

¶23

269-FA-864-2019.doc

¶24

Shantanu Dhudum

¶25

requested to allow the Appeal.

¶26

3. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.3/Insurance
Company submitted that no evidence was produced on record to
prove the income of the claimant. Learned counsel further submitted
that no permanent physical disability is caused to the claimant due to
accidental injuries. The disability certificate is given on higher side.
While passing the order, the tribunal has considered all the aspects.
No interference is required in it. Hence, requested to dismiss the
Appeal.

¶27

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

¶28

5. To prove the income, the Claimant, Maimuna Bhopalwala
examined herself at Exhibit-15. She has stated that due to accidental
injuries, she has suffered 45% permanent physical disability. She
further stated that before the accident she was running readymade
garments in Kurla and getting income, of Rs.3000/- to 4,000/- per
month and from that income she was maintaining her family. But,
due to accidental injuries, she has permanently disabled and she is
unable to perform any business.

¶29

3/5

¶30

269-FA-864-2019.doc

¶31

Shantanu Dhudum

¶32

6. While dealing with the issue of income of claimant, the

¶33

tribunal has observed that no evidence was produced on record to
prove that deceased was doing business. To prove the disability the
claimant has examined Dr. Satish Shah, he has stated that due to
accidental injuries the claimant has suffered following injuries;

¶34

1. Head injury,

¶35

2. Fracture of left radius distal/3rd,

¶36

3. Fracture of left tibia lower/3rd,

¶37

4. The patient had undergone major surgery with tibia
interlocking nailing and thereafter, she had undergone the
surgery for removal of implant.

¶38

.He further stated that due to accidental injuries the
claimant has suffered following disabilities.

¶39

1. Pain, limp, difficulty in walking in the left leg.

¶40

2. Pain in left wrist with difficult in grasping object.

¶41

3. Difficulty in doing cooking and house work.

¶42

4. The claimant gets on and off headache.

¶43

5. The claimant is not able to do her routine work.

¶44

7. While dealing with the issue of the disability, the Tribunal has observed that on the account of disability, claimant is not entitled

¶45

to any compensation and the tribunal has given reason for it, I do not

¶46

find infirmity in it. In my view, it has come on record that the
claimant had suffered fracture injuries there is no disability due to
fracture injuries. Considering nature of injuries and medical expenses

¶47

4/5

¶48

269-FA-864-2019.doc

¶49

Shantanu Dhudum

¶50

incurred on treatment, the Tribunal has awarded total compensation
of Rs.1,90,726/-. In my view, it is on lower side hence, I am
considering Rs.75,000/- more under all heads.

¶51

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

¶52

ORDER

¶53

i. Appeal is partly allowed.

¶54

ii. The claimant is entitled for enhanced amount of

¶55

Rs.75,000/- @ 7.5% interest per annum from the

¶56

date of filing claim petition till realisation of the

¶57

amount.

¶58

iii. The Respondent/Insurance Company shall

¶59

deposit the enhanced amount along with accrued
interest thereon, within six weeks after receipt of
the order.

¶60

iv. The claimant is permitted to withdraw the deposited amount along with accrued interest thereon.

¶61

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

¶62

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

¶63

5/5

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Maimuna Wd/O Akhtar Bhopalwala v. Mr. Abhijeet S/O Dayandeo Thorat 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

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.

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

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