Allowed

Mihir Madhusudan Revandkar Thr. Mother and Next Friend Madhuri Madhusudan Revandkar v. Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., Mumbai and Ors.

Bombay HC17 Apr 2024IA/7726/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interim application in a first appeal seeking partial withdrawal of compensation by a claimant blinded in a road accident. Despite the insurer's objection on contributory negligence, the court allowed withdrawal of 40% of the amount with accrued interest on furnishing an undertaking.

What did the court decide?

Applicants permitted to withdraw 40% of the amount along with accrued interest on furnishing undertaking.

Mihir Madhusudan Revandkar Thr. Mother and Next Friend… — Motor Accident Claims | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

51-2-IA-7726-24 IN FAST-24888-23.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.7726 OF 2024 IN

¶4

FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.24888 OF 2023

¶5

Mihir Madhusudan Revandkar …. Applicants Thr. Mother & Next Friend Madhuri Madhusudan Revandkar & Ors.

¶6

V/s.

¶7

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., …. Respondent

¶8

NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE

¶9

Mumbai

¶10

Digitally signed by NILAM SANTOSHKAMBLE ---Date: 2024.04.19 10:47:15 +0530 Mr.T. J. Mendon, for the Applicants. Ms.Pandit Kasar, for the Respondent. Mr.Pradyumna Thakur-Desai i/b Mr.D.S. Joshi, for Respondent No.4.

¶11

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

¶12

DATE : 17^th APRIL 2024

¶13

P.C:-

¶14

. By this Application, the Applicant is seeking

¶15

withdrawal of the amount.

¶16

It is contention of the learned counsel for the Applicants submit that due to accidental injuries the Applicant

¶17

has suffered 100% permanent physical disability. He has lost his both eyes in the accident. He is unable to do any work. He

¶18

N.S. Kamble page 1 of 2

¶19

51-2-IA-7726-24 IN FAST-24888-23.doc

¶20

needs amount for daily expenses and medical expenses. Hence, requested to allow the Application.

¶21

The learned counsel for the Respondent has objected to allow the Application on the ground that accident has occurred due to contributory negligence of the driver of car in which the Applicant was travelling, but the Tribunal has considered sole negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle, which is erroneous. Hence, requested to dismiss the Application.

¶22

I have heard both the learned counsel.

¶23

The Applicant has suffered disability in the accident.

¶24

He needs amount for daily expenses and medical expenses. The issue raised by the Respondent can be considered at the time of the final hearing. Hence, I pass following order.

¶25

ORDER

¶26

(i) The Application is allowed.

¶27

(ii) The Applicants are permitted to withdraw 40% amount along with accrued interest thereon on furnishing undertaking.

¶28

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

¶29

N.S. Kamble page 2 of 2

Mihir Madhusudan Revandkar Thr. Mother and Next Friend Madhuri Madhusudan Revandkar v. Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., Mumbai and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mihir Madhusudan Revandkar Thr. Mother and Next Friend Madhuri Madhusudan Revandkar v. Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., Mumbai 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

Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Jamir Amiruddin Sarkhot and Ors.

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Damodar Gangaram Manve and Ors.

Morshareel Bilaluddin Patel Vs Sarfraz Amirbasha Bikaji and Anr.

Vandana Tejas Ughade Vs Tejas Ishwar Ughade

Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., Pune Vs Chhaya Sadashiv Raut and Ors.

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Mrs. Archana Ramesh Mali @ Magdum and Ors.