Cholamandalam Ms Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd. vs Sangita Macchindra Gulave and Ors.

¶1

906-FA-861-2025-Judgment.doc

¶2

Shubhada S Kadam

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

FIRST APPEAL NO.861 OF 2025

¶5

Cholamandalam MS Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd. ) Hydraulic Mobile, Crane No. MH09CL 3353 ) Issuing and branch office – Mouni Vihar ) Apartment, 13,14,15 CS No. 1146/B, E ward, ) Takala Chowk, Tal. Karveer, Kolhapur – 416 ) 001 ) )

¶6

Policy No. 3380/00918138/000/00 ) Appellant Policy Period – 24/12/2015 to 23/12/2016 )… (Insurer) Versus

¶7

1 Sangita Macchindra Gulave ) Aged : 42 Years, Occ : Housewife ) R/o. Shindewadi – 413 506, ) Post : Keshegaon, Tal & Dist. Osmanabad ) 2 Balaji Macchindra Gulave ) Age 22 years, Occ : Education ) R/o. As above ) 3 Swapnil Macchindra Gulave ) Age 19 years, Occ : Education ) R/o. As above ) 4 Ranjeet Raosaheb Shelke ) Age : Major, Owner of Hydraulic Mobile crane ) R/o. Kaneriwadi, Tal. Karveer, Dist - Kolhapur ) 5 Jitendrakumar Rajendra Gond ) Age 23 years, Occ – Driver of hydraulic ) Mobile Crane, R/o. S. No.192, Chakrapani ) Colony, Bhosari – 411039, Pune, Dist. Pune ) ) (Present Respondent No.1 to 3 being original ) Claimants and Respondent No.4 & 5 being ) original opposite party No.1 and 3 ) respectively) )… Respondents

¶8

SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM

¶9

Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date: 2025.08.14 12:56:34 +0530

¶10

Mr. Rajesh Kanojia i/b. Res Juris, Advocates for the Appellant. Mr. Pritesh K. Bohade, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 3./Claimants.

¶11

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

¶12

DATE : 7^th AUGUST, 2025.

¶13

1/4

¶14

906-FA-861-2025-Judgment.doc

¶15

Shubhada S Kadam

¶16

Judgment :

¶17

This appeal is preferred by the appellant-Insurance Company against the Judgment and Order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kolhapur (for short “the Tribunal”).

¶18

It is contention of learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company that the Tribunal has considered monthly income of the deceased at Rs.25,000/- per month without any evidence on record. If the claimants concede for considering the income of deceased at Rs.15,000/per month, this appeal can be disposed of.

¶19

Learned counsel for respondents Nos.1 to 3/claimants submitted that the claimants are ready to accept the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- pm. He further submitted that the Tribunal has awarded consortium amount on lower side, it be awarded and requested to dispose of the appeal.

¶20

I have heard both learned counsel, perused the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal.

¶21

Both learned counsel are agreeable if the monthly income of the deceased is fixed at Rs.15,000/- instead of Rs.25,000/- considered by the Tribunal. Hence, I am considering monthly income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/-.

¶22

The Tribunal has awarded consortium amount on lower side. As per the view of Hon’ble Apex Court in Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Nanu Ram, 2018 ACJ 2782 (SC) , each claimant is entitled

¶23

2/4

¶24

906-FA-861-2025-Judgment.doc

¶25

Shubhada S Kadam

¶26

for Rs.48000/- as consortium amount, Rs.18,000/- for loss of estate and

¶27

Rs.18000/- for funeral expenses.

¶28

Considering the above calculations, the claimants are entitled

¶29

for following compensation :

¶30

Particulars	Rs.	Amount
Annual Income (Rs.15,000/- x 12)	Rs.	1,80,000.00
25% future prospects	Rs.	45,000.00
Total	Rs.	2,25,000.00
1/3rd deduction towards personal	Rs.	75,000.00
expenses
Total	Rs.	1,70,000.00
Rs.1,50,000/- x 13(multiplier)	Rs.	19,50,000.00
Consortium (Rs.48,000/- x 3	Rs.	1,44,000.00
(claimants))
Funeral Expenses	Rs.	18,000.00
Loss of Estate	Rs.	18,000.00
Total Compensation	Rs.	21,30,000.00