:1:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 8119 OF 2007

Smt. Sindhu Sanjay Vharkute

and ors. ..Petitioners

Vs.

Smt. Babai Sanjay Vharkute and ors. ..Respondents

Mr. Prataprao J. Shinde for petitioners.

Mr. V.S. Talkute for respondent nos.1 to 3.

Mr. S.S. Vidyarthi for respondent no.4.

CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.

CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.

CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.

Date : April 17, 2008.

Date : April 17, 2008.

Date : April 17, 2008.

P.C.:

P.C.:

P.C.:

1. Heard Mr. Shinde the learned counsel for the

petitioners.

2. Rule.

3. Mr. Talkute waives service for respondent

nos.1 to 3 and Mr. Vidyarthi waives service for

respondent no.4. Petition is taken up for final

hearing forthwith.

:2:

4. Petitioner No.1 is the wife of Sanjay Vharkute

and petitioner nos.2 to 4 are her children born from

Sanjay Vharkute. Respondent no.1 claims that she was

married to Sanjay Vharkute on 14/8/1985 and respondent

no.2 was born on 16/5/1987 and respondent no.3 was

born on 1/5/1989. As per the contentions of

respondent no.1, it was thereafter that Sanjay

Vharkute married petitioner no.1 and begot three

children from her. Sanjay Vharkute was a driver and

he died in an accident that had taken place on

14/8/1998. The petitioners had filed Motor Accident

Claim Petition No. 705 of 1998 and claimed for

compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The

respondents were not joined as additional

applicants/claimants. The Claim Petition was allowed

by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal

at Satara on 21/2/2003 and the owner of the vehicle

and the insurance company were directed to pay jointly

and severally an amount of Rs.2,73,000/- with future

interest at 9% per annum from the date of the petition

i.e. 28/10/1998 till realisation of the entire amount

of compensation and interest. The amount of

:3:

compensation shall be inclusive of the amount, if any

received by the petitioners, of no fault liability.

The Tribunal further directed that the compensation

deposited shall be paid to all the petitioners in

equal proportion. But so far as the share of

petitioner nos. 2 to 4 was concerned, it was directed

to be deposited in a nationalised bank till they

attained majority. They were shown as minors in the

Claim Petition. However, as of now, it is not known

whether any of them has attained majority or married.

So far as the share of petitioner no.1 is concerned,

she has withdrawn the same and perhaps spent for the

household expenses. In addition she has been getting

interest on the amount invested by way of fixed

deposit as the guardian of petitioner nos.2 to 4.

5. The respondents submitted delay condonation

Application No.