SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 1600

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
SMT.AMBUBAI GURU KALE.... – Respondent
FA 97 / 2013



HEMANT CHANDERSEN SHIV Digitally signed by HEMANT CHANDERSEN SHIV IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY Date: 2025.04.21 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

10:48:35 +0300 FIRST APPEAL NO.97 OF 2013 United India Insurance Company Ltd.

Mumbai Regional Office II, Maker Bhavan No.2, 3rd Floor, Sir V. T. Marg, Mumbai 400 020 ….. Appellant v/s.

1. Smt. Ambubai Guru Kale Aged 35 years, Mother of the deceased …..

2. Ms. Sunder Guru Kale Aged 13 years, Sister of the deceased …..

3. Ms. Anju Guru Kale Aged 10 years, Sister of the deceased …..

4. Rahul Guru Kale Aged 6 years, Brother of the deceased …..

5. Shiva Guru Kale Aged 4 years, Brother of the deceased …..

Applicant Nos.2 to 5 are minors Through their mother and next friend Smt. Ambubai Guru Kale, all residing at Rajaram Wadi, Sambhaji Nagar, Ambewadi Zopadpatti, Vile Parle, Mumbai …..

6. Mrs. Ranjana H. Agaskar

701, Jade Gardenor, Ambedkar Road, Khar (West), Mumbai 400 052 (owner of M/Car No.MMB-8423) ….. Respondents WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 6834 OF 2024 AND CROSS OBJECTION STAMP NO.6532 OF 2024 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.97 OF 2013 United India Insurance Company Ltd.

Mumbai Regional Office II, Maker Bhavan No.2, 3rd Floor, Sir V. T. Marg, Mumbai 400 020 ….. Appellant v/s.

1. Smt. Ambubai Guru Kale Aged 35 years, Mother of the deceased …..

2. Ms. Sunder Guru Kale Aged 13 years, Sister of the deceased …..

3. Ms. Anju Guru Kale Aged 10 years, Sister of the deceased …..

4. Rahul Guru Kale Aged 6 years, Brother of the deceased …..

5. Shiva Guru Kale Aged 4 years, Brother of the deceased …..

Applicant Nos.2 to 5 are minors Through their mother and next friend Smt. Ambubai Guru Kale, all residing at Rajaram Wadi, Sambhaji Nagar, Ambewadi Zopadpatti, Vile Parle, Mumbai …..

6. Mrs. Ranjana H. Agaskar

701, Jade Gardenor, Ambedkar Road, Khar (West), Mumbai 400 052 (owner of M/Car No.MMB-8423) ….. Respondents Ms. Varsha Chavan for the Appellant.

Mr. D. S. Joshi with Ms. S. U. Mehta and Mr. P. S. Thakur Desai for Respondent Nos.1 to 5.

CORAM : SHYAM C. CHANDAK,J.

DATE : 4th APRIL, 2025 JUDGMENT :-

. This Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (“the Act”) challenged the Judgment and Order dated 07/04/2012, in Motor Accident Claim Application No.1282 of 2005 (“claim”), passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mumbai thereby said claim filed under Section 166 of the Act by Respondent Nos.1 to 5 (“claimants”) was partly allowed with proportionate costs and the Appellant/insurer and Respondent No.6/Original Opponent No.1-owner of the offending vehicle held liable to pay the Respondent Nos.1 to 5 the compensation in the sum of Rs.2,50,000/- including ‘No Fault Liability’ amount along with interest at the rate of 8.5% per annum from the date of the claim till the realisation of entire award amount.

2) Record indicates that Appeal was admitted on 01/07/2015. By order dated 26/02/2024, the Appeal was posted to 18/03/2024, for the final hearing. Meanwhile the aforesaid Interim Application and the Cross objection have been filed by the claimants on dated 06.03.2024.

3) The Appeal is filed on the ground that the subject vehicle was not involved in the accident but some other vehicle caused the accident; that, there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the said vehicle; that, in the alternative, this is a case of contributory negligence. The Interim Application seeking condonation of delay in filing the cross-

objection.

3.1) In the Cross-objection the claimants contended that the compensation awarded is not adequate because the Tribunal wrongly held that the deceased was only helping her mother in the flower business, therefore, her notional income was Rs.15,000/- per annum; that no compensation has been awarded towards the future prospects and that, the rate of the interest is on lower side.

3.2) Hence, the Appeal, the Interim Application and the Cross-

objection are being disposed of together.

4) Heard Ms.Chavan, the learned Advocate for the Appellant and Mr.Joshi, the learned Advocate for Respondent Nos

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top