National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Manager Authorized Signatory vs Vaishali Dattatray Panchal and others. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Manager Authorized Signatory vs Vaishali Dattatray Panchal and others. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Composite order: (i) stay application allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ and disposed of (entire awarded amount stated to be deposited in the Court); (ii) withdrawal application partly allowed — 25% of the amount deposited by the appellant withdrawable with accrued interest on usual undertaking to the Registrar (Judicial), further 25% with accrued interest on solvent surety/security, and Registry directed not to insist on actual valuation of property through Revenue Officers for surety/security; (iii) delay of 40 days in filing the first appeal condoned; (iv) notice issued in the first appeal, returnable on 06.07.2026, with Mr. Avinash Hande waiving service for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

Issue for consideration

Whether the application seeking stay of execution of the impugned judgment and award should be allowed. +2 more

Court's answer

Application for stay of execution of the impugned judgment and award is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ and disposed of; the advocate for the applicant/appellant had submitted that the entire amount as per the impugned judgment and award stands deposited in this Court.

Ratio / Principle

Withdrawal application partly allowed: the applicant/s is/are permitted to withdraw 25% of the amount deposited by the appellant in this court with accrued interest thereon on furnishing usual undertaking to the satisfaction of the learned Registrar (Judicial), and a further 25% with accrued interest thereon on furnishing solvent surety/security to the satisfaction of the learned Registrar (Judicial).

Key takeaways

The Registry is directed not to insist on the actual valuation of the property through Revenue Officers for the purpose of submitting surety/security.ratio¶41
The delay-condonation Civil Application is allowed and disposed of; the delay of 40 days caused in filing the first appeal is condoned.ratio¶54
Reason for condoning the 40-day delay: the application deserves to be allowed in the interest of justice as the delay is neither deliberate nor intentional.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench (Sanjay A. Deshmukh, J.), order dated 04.05.2026 disposing of three Civil Applications arising out of First Appeal FAST/32242/2025 between Vaishali Dattatray Panchal and National Insurance Co Ltd: (i) application for stay of execution of the impugned judgment and award allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ and disposed of, the entire amount as per the impugned judgment and award having been stated to be deposited in the Court; (ii) application for withdrawal of the deposited amount partly allowed — 25% of the amount deposited by the appellant, with accrued interest, withdrawable on usual undertaking to the learned Registrar (Judicial), and a further 25% with accrued interest on furnishing solvent surety/security, the Registry being directed not to insist on actual valuation of property through Revenue Officers for the purpose of submitting surety/security; (iii) delay of 40 days in filing the first appeal condoned as neither deliberate nor intentional; (iv) notice in the first appeal issued, returnable on 06.07.2026, with Mr. Avinash Hande waiving service for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

56 CA NO. 4134 OF 2026.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

56 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4134 OF 2026

IN FAST/32242/2025

Vaishali Wo Dattatray Panchal VERSUS

National Insurance Co Ltd

Mr. Avinash Hande, Advocate for Applicant Mr. A. S. Usmanpurkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1

WITH

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12067 OF 2025 IN FAST/32242/2025

National Insurance Co Ltd Through Manager Authorized Signatory VERSUS

Vaishali Dattatray Panchal And Others.

Mr. A. S. Usmanpurkar, Advocate for Applicant Mr. Avinash Hande, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 3

WITH

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12068 OF 2025 IN FAST/32242/2025

National Insurance Co Ltd Through Manager Authorized Signatory

VERSUS

Vaishali Dattatray Panchal And Others.

Mr. A. S. Usmanpurkar, Advocate for Applicant Mr. Avinash Hande, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 3

CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.

DATE : 04.05.2026

PER COURT :-

APPLICATION FOR STAY

This is an application seeking stay to the execution of

1 of 4

(( 2 )) 56 CA NO. 4134 OF 2026

the impugned judgment and award.

The learned advocate for the applicant / appellant submits that the entire amount as per the impugned judgment and award is deposited in this Court.

In view of the above, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ and disposed of.

APPLICATION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF AMOUNT

This is an application seeking permission to withdraw the

amount deposited in this Court pursuant to the award.

Heard the learned advocates for both sides.

Learned advocate for the respondent/Insurance company

strongly opposed the application and submitted that there was a delay of 7 days in lodging the report. Therefore, he prayed to reject the application.

Perused the application. For the reasons stated therein and considering the arguments of both the sides, it would be proper to partly allow the application. Hence, the following order:

::ORDER::

2 of 4

(( 3 )) 56 CA NO. 4134 OF 2026

a. The application is partly allowed.

b. The applicant/s is/are permitted to withdraw 25% of the amount out of the amount deposited by the appellant in this court, with accrued interest thereon, on furnishing usual undertaking to the satisfaction of the learned Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. Further 25% of the amount with accrued interest thereon is allowed to be withdrawn on furnishing solvent surety/security to the satisfaction of the learned Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.

c. The Registry is directed not to insist on the actual valuation of the property through Revenue Officers for the purpose of submitting surety/security.

APPLICATION FOR DELAY

Heard the learned Advocates for the parties.

This is an application for condonation of delay of 40 days caused in filing the first appeal.

The learned Advocate for respondent strongly opposed

the application and submitted that there is no sufficient reason to

3 of 4

(( 4 )) 56 CA NO. 4134 OF 2026

condone the delay.

Perused the application. For the reasons stated therein,

the application deserves to be allowed in the interest of justice as the delay is neither deliberate nor intentional. Hence, the following order:

::ORDER::

a. Civil Application is allowed and disposed of.

b. The delay of 40 days caused in filing the first appeal is

condoned.

FIRST APPEAL

Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on

06.07.2026.

Mr. Avinash Hande, learned Advocate waives service of

notice for Respondent Nos.1 to 3.

[ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ]

HRJadhav

4 of 4