Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2017 DAILYLAW 3201 (BOM)

MANGAL SANJAY DHADGE AND ORS v. SACHIN VITTHAL SADAVARTE AND ORS

CA/6842/2017 · 2026-08-21

body2017

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 912-ca-6842-2017.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6842 OF 2017 IN FAST/35304/2016 Mangal Sanjay Dhadge And Ors VERSUS Sachin Vitthal Sadavarte And Ors ... Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Jayabhar Dattatraya R. Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. M.M. Ambhore Advocate for Respondent No.4 : Mr. V.S. Kulkarni h/f Mr. A.S. Usmanpurkar ... CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. DATED : AUGUST 21, 2026 P.C.: In Civil Application : 1. The original claimants/appellants in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.740 of 2011 have filed present application seeking condonation of delay of 60 days in filing first appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 2. The appellants are seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The delay of 60 days is attributed to lack of funds for approaching this Court. 3. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the application for delay is allowed. First Appeal be registered in accordance with law. In First Appeal : 1. Heard finally with consent of respective parties. 2026:BHC-AUG:38657 2 912-ca-6842-2017.odt 2. Learned advocates representing both insurance company are present in the Court. The owners of respective vehicles have not entered appearance. However, perusal of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal will demonstrate that insurance company of both vehicles are also held liable. In that view of the matter, the appeal can be taken up for hearing even in the absence of owners of offending vehicles. 3. The only point that arises for consideration in the appeal is as to what should be the amount of compensation payable to the appellants/original petitioners. The owners or insurance company have not filed any appeal challenging the award. The only contention raised in the appeal is that while computing compensation payable under the head of loss of income, future prospects have not been taken into consideration. It is not in dispute that the deceased was a self- employed person and he was 38 years of age at the time of his demise on account of motor accident. Perusal of the judgment will also indicate that the compensation is computed without taking into consideration loss of future prospects. 4. In light of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Pranay Sethi, 2017 (16) SCC 680, the appellants/claimants will be entitled to 40% enhancement towards future prospects. The compensation payable under the monetary head 3 912-ca-6842-2017.odt is Rs.6,75,000/-, which is not disputed by respondents. Therefore, further enhancement of Rs.2,70,000/- is granted against monetary heads. 5. However, it appears that while dealing with the judgment, learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- to appellant no.1/wife towards loss of consortium, which should be Rs.40,000/-. Likewise, amount of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rs.50,000/- each is awarded to appellant nos.2 to 6) towards loss of love and affection. In fact, appellant nos.2 to 6 are only entitled to sum of Rs.40,000/- each towards loss of consortium. Therefore, this amount of Rs.3,50,000/- awarded towards loss of consortium and loss of love and affection is required to be reduced to Rs.2,40,000/-. Apart from this, amount of Rs.25,000/- is awarded towards funeral expenses and Rs.25,000/- is awarded towards loss of estate. This amount is also required to be reduced to Rs.15,000/- each. The total amount of compensation is arrived at Rs.12,15,000/- (Rs.9,45,000 + Rs.2,40,000 + Rs.30,000). As against the amount of compensation of Rs.10,75,000/- awarded by learned Member Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmednagar, appeal is partly allowed in following terms : ORDER (I) First Appeal is partly allowed. (II) The appellant nos.1 to 5 are entitled to get Rs.12,15,000/- 4 912-ca-6842-2017.odt (Rupees twelve lakh and fifteen thousand only) inclusive of the amount (Rupees 50,000/-) of 'no fault liability’. (III) The Opponent nos.1 and 2 do pay jointly and severally Rs.12,15,000/- (Rupees twelve lakh and fifteen thousand only) to the appellant nos.1 to 5, inclusive of amount of 'no fault liability', with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of depositing of the said amount, in the Tribunal. (IV) The parties shall bear their own costs. [ROHIT W. JOSHI J.] Mujaheed//