Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY AT AURANGABAD BENCH
P.R. Bora, J.
New Indian Insurance Company Ltd Through Its Authorized Signatory/senior Divisional Manager/in-charge Legal Hub, Mahesh Compound - Appellant
Versus
Archana Wd/o Rambhau Anjaan - Respondent
First Appeal No. 1983 of 2018, 1984 of 2018, 1985 of 2018, 1986 of 2018, 1988 of 2018, 1990 of 2018, 1991 of 2018, 1992 of 2018
Decided On : 19-10-2018
Motor Accident Claims - Appeal filed against judgment and award - Appeal is arising amount of compensation - Appeals are arising out of one accident happened having involvement of a truck owned by present respondent no.6 and insured with appellant-insurance company - Appeal is filed against judgment and award passed in Motor Accident Claim Petition said claim petition was filed by the legal representatives of deceased who suffered death in the aforesaid accident - Claimants in the remaining six petitions are the persons injured in the aforesaid accident - I deem it appropriate to note down the relevant information in tabular form showing the first appeal number and motor accident number out of which said appeal is arising and the amount of compensation awarded in the said petition by Tribunal – Held, Having regard to age of deceased, appropriate multiplier would be of 16. By applying the same, the amount of compensation comes to Rs. 46,02,816/-. In addition to this the claimants are also entitled to the compensation of Rs. 70,000/- towards nonpecuniary damages. Total amount of compensation thus comes to Rs. 46,72,816/-. In facts and circumstances of case, it appears to me that this will be the just and fair compensation payable to the claimants in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 477 of 2015. The impugned award, needs to be modified to the aforesaid extent - In so far as other six petitions are concerned, which are filed by the persons injured in alleged accident, though it was argued by Shri Deshmukh, learned counsel appearing for appellant-insurance company that unreasonable compensation has been awarded to them by Tribunal without any supportive evidence therefore, on perusal of the evidence in all those matters it does not appear to me that in any of said case amount of compensation awarded by Tribunal is excessive or unreasonable - Objection raised by appellant-insurance company in that regard, therefore, does not carry any substance and deserves to be rejected - Appeals allowed.
JUDGMENT
P.R. Bora, J. - These seven appeals are arising out of one accident happened on 28.05.2015 having involvement of a truck bearing Registration No. MH20-BT-3578 owned by present respondent no.6 and insured with the appellant-insurance company.
Though the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Aurangabad has decided each of the claim petition by a separate judgment, the defences raised by the insurance company in all those petitions were common. The appellant-insurance company though has filed separate appeals in view of the fact that every petition was decided by a separate judgment, common objections are raised by the insurance company in exception to the judgments and awards passed in the aforesaid claim petitions. In the circumstances, I heard the common arguments in these appeals and I deem it appropriate to decide all these appeals by a common reasoning.
2. The First Appeal No.1983 of 2018 is filed against the judgment and award passed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 477 of 2015. The said claim petition was filed by the legal representatives of deceased Rambhau Anjaan, who suffered death in the aforesaid accident. The claimants in the remaining six petitions are the persons injured in the aforesaid accident. I deem it appropriate to note down the relevant information in tabular form showing the first appeal number and motor accident number out of which the said appeal is arising and the amount of compensation awarded in the said petition by the Tribunal.
| Sr. No. | First Appeal No. | Name of the Party | MACP No. | Nature of Claim | Award amount in Rs. |
| 1 | 1983/ 2018 | New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Archana Rambhau Anjaan | MACP 477/2015 | DeathclaimDeceased Rambhau Anjaan | Rs. 52,66,672/interest @ 9% p.a. |
| 2 | 1984/ 2018 | New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Limbarao Gadade | MACP 563/2015 | Injury Claim | Rs.2,07,208 /with interest @ 9% |
| 3 | 1985/ 2018 | New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Ramraja Uttam Bodhale | MACP 566/2015 | Injury Claim | Rs. 1,48,000/with interest @ 9% |
| 4 | 1986/ 2018 | New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Mangal Bapu Kale | MACP 565/2015 | Injury Claim | Rs. 89,188/along with 9% interest |
| 5 | 1988/ 2018 | New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Govind Devkate | MACP 564/2015 | Injury Claim | Rs. 49,000/along with interest @ 9% p.a. |
| 6 | 1991/ 2018 | New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Vishnu Sultane | MACP 561/2015 | Injury Claim | Rs. 73,124/along with interest @ 9% p.a. |
| 7 | 1992/ 2018 | New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Liladhar Badgujar | MACP 562/2015 | Injury Claim | Rs. 1,70,528/along with interest @ 9% p.a. |
3. The claim petitions were resisted by all the three respondents i.e. driver, owner and insurer of the offending truck. In each of the claim petition, respondent no.1 was the insurance company, respondent no.2 was the owner and respondent no.3 was the driver of the offending truck. Respondent nos. 2 and 3 i.e. owner and driver of the truck had filed their joint written statement denying the contentions raised in the petition. Respondent no.1-insurance company had raised the defence of the breach of policy conditions by owner of the offending truck alleging that he allowed respondent no.3 to drive the offending truck though having knowledge that on the date of accident, said respondent no.3 was not holding th
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
