IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 91 OF 2016

1. Swapna Ajit Shah } Age-47 years, Occ:Household }

}

2. Phulchand Lalchand Shah } (

Deleted as per order Age-75 years, Occ: Household } dated 31/01/2025)

}

3. Nikhil Ajit Shah }

Digitally signed NILAM by NILAM Age-26 years, Occ: Education }

SANTOSH SANTOSH KAMBLE KAMBLE Date: }

2025.04.24

14:39:54 +0530

4. Nital Ajit Shah }

...Appellants Age-24 years, Occ: Education }

(Org.

All R/o Kadegaon, Taluka-Kadegaon, }

Claimants)

District-Sangli }

Versus

1. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. } 451, Mata Building, Ambedkar Road, Sangli } 2. B.G. Chitale Dairy Pvt. Ltd. } At Post Bhilwadi, Taluka-Palus, } District-Sangli, }

Thr. Parashuram Bhaskar Chitale, } ...Respondents Age-Major, Occ: Diary, } R/o Bhwandi, Taluka-Tasgaon, } District-Sangli } 3. Vikram Vishrant Yadav } Age-43 years, Occ: Driver, }

R/o. 299, Shinde Galli, Tasgaon, } ….Respondents District-Sangli. } (Org. Opponents ----

Mr.Bhushan Walimbe, for the Appellant.

Ms.Shalini Shankar, for Respondent No.1.

----

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 08^th APRIL 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT :-

. By this Appeal, the Appellants-Claimants are seeking enhancement of the compensation.

2. It is contention of the learned counsel for the Appellant’s that, the deceased has died due to accidental injuries. At the time of the accident deceased was 48 years old, he was earning Rs.6,60,000/- per annum from various business such as agriculture, milk and cloth business, he was also working in cloth shop of his father. The deceased was looking after his family. The Appellants have examined the witnesses to prove the income of the deceased, but the Tribunal has considered the monthly income of the deceased on lower side i.e. notional income at Rs.3,000/- per month, it is on lower side and on that basis compensation is awarded. The learned counsel further submitted that, the Tribunal has awarded consortium on lower side, it be awarded. The Tribunal has not awarded future prospects and deduction for personal expenses, should be 1/4th and the Tribunal has deducted 1/3rd and requested to allow the Appeal.

3. It is contention of the learned counsel for the Respondent-Insurance company that, the Appellants failed to prove the income of the deceased. The milk business and agricultural business is continued after death of the deceased. The license of cloth shop was in the name of father of the deceased. The Tribunal has considered monthly income of the deceased correctly, no interference is required in it. The Tribunal has passed well reasoned order and requested to dismiss the Appeal.

4. I have heard both learned counsel. Perused judgment and order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (‘The Tribunal’ for short), Sangli.

5. To prove the income of deceased, the Claimants have examined the Claimant No.2 Anil Shah-brother of the deceased at Exhibit-61. He has stated that, the deceased was cultivating agricultural land of their family and was taking crops from it. He was also doing milk business and he was getting Rs.1,20,000/- income yearly from the said business. He has further stated that, the deceased was doing cloth business and was working in ready made store of their family and his father was paying him Rs.2,40,000/- per year.

6. In cross-examination he admitted that, the agricultural land is standing in their father’s name and his father was paying income tax. He admits that, he does not know how much agricultural land is standing in his name and his brothers name. He has the pass-book showing the detail’s of milk provided to dairy, but he has not produced the said pass-book before the Tribunal. He further admitted that, the deceased was not paying Income Tax. He further admitted that, after death of his brother he is doing agricultural work.

7. The Claimants have examined PW-3 Laxman Thorat, Secretary of Jyotirling Dudh Utpadak Sanstha Ltd., Kadegaon. He has stated that, the deceased was member of their Sanstha and he was giving milk to th