Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
NEERAJ P.DHOTE
Future Generali Insurance Company, Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Mast. Rakshit Sagar Katariya – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of appeal grounds and the accident's circumstances. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments by both parties regarding negligence and compensation. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's examination of negligence and income assessment. (Para 7 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. explanation of contributory negligence principles. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This is an Appeal fled under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [hereinafter referred to as the ‘M. V. Act’] by the Appellant – Insurance Company against the Judgment and Award dated 03/09/2019, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmednagar, [hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned Tribunal’], in Motor Accident Claim Petition [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Claim Petition’] No.466/2017, awarding the compensation to the tune of Rs.16,42,800/- [Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Forty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Only] against the Appellant - Insurance Company and the owner of the offending vehicle, who is arraigned as Respondent No.5 in the Appeal, along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of Claim Petition till realization of the amount.
[I] Respondent Nos.1 to 4 [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Original Claimants’] fled the above referred
The court established that liability in motor vehicle accidents assesses negligence irrespective of contributory claims, reinforcing compensation entitlements for bereaved families.
Negligence in vehicular accidents requires clear evidence linking fault to the driver; contributory negligence must be proved to reduce liability.
Compensation calculation in motor vehicle accident cases must reflect established income and future prospects as per judicial standards.
In case all the joint tort feasors have been impleaded and evidence is sufficient, it is open to the court/tribunal to determine inter se extent of composite negligence of the drivers
Contributory negligence must be proven with evidence; mere violation of safety regulations does not automatically imply negligence. Loss of consortium quantified at Rs.40,000/- for each claimant.
An employee dies in harness even in normal course, due to illness and to maintain the family of the deceased one of the dependents may be entitled for compassionate appointment but that cannot be ter....
Family mainly the widow would as per the rules will receive a sum, which will aggregate to upto 2025 Rs. 67,28,256/- for a period of 12 years which will not permit us to disturb the findings as far n....
Contributory negligence must be substantiated by evidence; lack thereof necessitates full liability of the insurer, not apportionment of compensation.
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
