The Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., Nagpur v. Ashok S/O Arjun Ganvir And Others
1 / 2 47.caf3737.2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (CAF) NO. 3737 OF 2024 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 161 OF 2025 The Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., Nagpur Vs.
Ashok S/o Arjun Ganvir and Ors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.
or directions and Registrar's orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Vedant Akhade, Advocate h/f Mr. Amit Kukday, Advocate for applicant.
Mr. K.P. Mirache, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 & 2. CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.
DATE : 21.02.2025.
The respondent Nos.1 and 2, who are original claim petitioners are moved the present application seeking withdrawal of amount of compensation deposited by the appellant with this Court in compliance of order granting stay to the execution of the impugned judgment and award. 2.
Having perused the judgment delivered by the learned Tribunal, it appears that the learned Tribunal has computed the amount of compensation on the basis of notional income of the deceased which is taken at Rs.7,000/- per month. The Prity
2 / 2 47.caf3737.2024 amount, prima facie, appears to be properly computed. The applicants, who are original claim petitioners are parents of the deceased. In such circumstances, in my considered opinion, it will be appropriate to permit the appellants, who are original claim petitioners to withdraw 50% of the amount of compensation with accrued interest on furnishing usual undertaking.
3.
Two weeks time is granted to provide the correct address of respondent No.3.
4.
The appellant is permitted to amend the cause title in order to incorporate correct address of respondent No.3.
5.
On correct address be provided, issue fresh notice to respondent No.3, returnable in six weeks.
6.
In addition to regular mode of service, the appellant is permitted to serve the respondent No.3 by all other permissible modes.
(ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.) Prity