Appellate Court dismissed appeal challenging motor accident tribunal award. Held that delay in FIR was explained and not challenged in cross-examination; vehicle involvement established. Compensation calculation based on income and multiplier was found correct. Appeal dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
24_FA_909_2024.DOC
Shivgan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL NO. 909 OF 2024
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Divisional Manager
…Appellant
Versus
Jayashri Ramesh Deore and Ors.
…Respondents
WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.7467 OF 2024
IN
FIRST APPEAL NO. 909 OF 2024
Jayashri Ramesh Deore and Ors. …Applicants
Versus
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Through …Respondents Divisional Manager
CORAM: R. M. JOSHI, J. DATED: 21st JANUARY, 2026.
PC:-
Page 1 of 4
21st January, 2026.
24_FA_909_2024.DOC
death claim filed by the Claimants was allowed directing payment of compensation of Rs.22,19,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a..
Page 2 of 4
21st January, 2026.
24_FA_909_2024.DOC
gave forceful dash to the Ape Riksha. As a result of which, the deceased was thrown out of Ape Riksha and sustained serious injuries to his head. She states in the FIR that her husband was initially admitted in Suvidha Hospital, Malegaon and from there, he was shifted to Sahyadri Hospital, Nashik. Thereafter, he died. It is claimed by the Informant that in such circumstances, no report could be lodged immediately. The Informant therefore, explains the delay. In this back-drop, perusal of the cross-examination of the Informant indicates that there was not even suggestion made to the Claimant No.1 that she lodged false report. Thus, there is no evidence to hold that the report in question is not genuine. Since there is even no cross-examination conducted by suggesting noninvolvement of the offending vehicle in the accident, this Court finds no reason to cause interference in the findings recorded by the Tribunal with regard to the accident and the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle in occurrence thereof.
Page 3 of 4
21st January, 2026.
24_FA_909_2024.DOC
award. Apart from the fact that other claims arising out of the same accident have been allowed by the Tribunal, perusal of the facts of the present case from the record indicates that even otherwise there is no merit in the Appeal.
10. First Appeal stands dismissed.
(R. M. JOSHI, J.)
Digitally signed by SHAMBHAVI SHAMBHAVI NILESH NILESH SHIVGAN SHIVGAN Date: 2026.01.23 20:02:07 +0530
Page 4 of 4
21st January, 2026.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay in lodging FIR created serious doubt regarding the involvement of the offending vehicle?
Whether the quantum of compensation granted was supported by documentary evidence?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Jayashri Ramesh Deore
Ors.
R. M. JOSHI
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
