Allowed

Chottidevi W/O. Nathuram and Ors. v. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Thr Its Asst. Manager Mumbai Regional Officer T P Hub

Bombay HC17 Oct 2024IA/13546/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Claimants sought withdrawal of part of deposited motor accident compensation while the insurer's first appeal was pending, citing breach of policy terms. The court allowed withdrawal of 30% of the deposit with accrued interest, subject to undertaking, deferring policy-breach issues to final hearing.

What did the court decide?

Applicants permitted to withdraw 30% of deposited amount with accrued interest, subject to usual undertaking.

Chottidevi W/O. Nathuram and Ors. vs the Oriental… — Motor Accident Claims | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

47-IA-13546-24 (withdrawal).doc

¶2

S.S.Kilaje

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13546 OF 2024

¶6

¶7

FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 35437 OF 2023

¶8

Chottidevi w/o. Nathuram and Ors. … Applicants

¶9

Versus

¶10

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. ... Respondent

¶11

Digitally signed SONALI by SONALISATISH KILAJE SATISH Date:2024.11.19 KILAJE 18:18:33+0700

¶12

Mr. S.G.Thorat, Advocate for Applicants. Mr. Nikhil N. Pawar, Advocate for the Respondent-Insurance Company

¶13

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATED : 19^th NOVEMBER, 2024.

¶14

P.C. :

¶15

By this application, applicants are seeking withdrawal of

¶16

amount.

¶17

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicants that deceased was the sole earning member of the applicants’ family. They have no source of income. They need the amount for daily expenses, hence, requested to allow the application.

¶18

Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company submits that accident occurred due to sole negligence of the deceased. There was breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy. As per the

¶19

insurance policy, the offending tractor supposed to use for agriculture

¶20

purpose only but it was used only for other purposes i.e. carrying the goods

¶21

1/2

¶22

S.S.Kilaje

¶23

47-IA-13546-24 (withdrawal).doc

¶24

etc. but this fact is not considered by the Tribunal, hence requested to reject the application.

¶25

I have heard both the learned counsel. The deceased was the sole earning member of the applicants’ family. The applicants have no source of income. They need the amount for daily expenses. The issues raised by the learned counsel for the appellant - Insurance Company can be considered at the time of final hearing of the appeal. Considering this facts, I pass following order :

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

i. The application is allowed.

¶28

ii. Applicants are permitted to withdraw 30% amount out of the deposited amount along with accrued interest thereon, subject to filing usual undertaking.

¶29

Application is disposed off.

¶30

( SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

¶31

2/2

Chottidevi W/O. Nathuram and Ors. v. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Thr Its Asst. Manager Mumbai Regional Officer T P Hub

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chottidevi W/O. Nathuram and Ors. v. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Thr Its Asst. Manager Mumbai Regional Officer T P Hub

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

Raja @ Raju Nagesh Koli vs State of Maharashtra

Harshad Vikram Kamble vs the State of Maharashtra

Shivnath Gavba Madhe vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Machindra Savta Raikar vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors.

Machindra Savta Raikar vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors.

Sonali Shankar Hire and Ors. vs National Insurance Company Limited