Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd.,Thane Thr.The General Manager v. Dnyaneshwar Tukaram Jundare And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 2037 OF 2024 The General Manager Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd.

Regd. Address - 601, 6th Floor, B-Wing, Rounak Arked, Gokhale Road, Thane West - 400 602 ) ) ) ) Appellant versus Dnyaneshwar Tukaram Jundare Age - 50 years, Occu - labour ) ) Sou. Sundarabai Dyaneshwar Jundare Age 48 Years, Occu - Household R/o. Andarsul, Tal. Yeola Dist. Nashik ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Respondents ............

Ms. Shalini Shankar, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr. Pritesh K. Bohade, Advocate for the Respondent No.1 and 2. Sadiqkhan Shabbir Khan Age 50 years, Occu - Owner of the Vehicle, R/o. Ajaj, 146 Jabaran Colony, Begam Bag, Ujjain, MP SONALI SATISH KILAJE by SONALI SATISH KILAJE Date:

2025.12.16 13:50:45 +0700 CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.

DATE : 9th DECEMBER, 2025.

ORAL JUDGMENT :

1.

By consent of both the sides heard finally at the stage of admission. 2.

This appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act takes exception to Judgment and Award dated 20.02.2024 passed in M.A.C.P. No. 87 of 2018, whereby compensation of Rs.11,40,000/- is granted to 1/4

claimants with interest @7% p.a. from the date of application till realisation of amount.

3.

This appeal has been filed essentially on the ground that the Tribunal has committed error in deducting 1/3rd amount towards personal expenses of the deceased instead of 1/2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that admittedly the deceased was aged about 30 years and was unmarried and was not having more number of family members dependent upon him. In such circumstances, in the view of Sarla Verma & Ors vs Delhi Transport Corp. & Anr.1, deduction towards personal expenses be considered as 1/2 instead of 1/3.

4.

Learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2/original claimants opposed the appeal.

5.

In case of Sarla Verma (supra) the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that in case of death of unmarried person, half of the income should be treated towards his personal expenses. Of course in some other judgments it is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that where the members of family of deceased are more, even an unmarried person is expected to spent more on them than self. Here in this case however there are only two dependents on him. Hence, the judgment in case of the Sarla Verma (supra) would have square application. Consequently, it is held that learned Tribunal has committed error in deducting 1/3rd amount towards AIR 2009 SC 3104 2/4

his personal expenses instead of 1/2. This needs correction. The appeal, therefore, stands partly allowed.

6.

The Claimants would be entitled for compensation which is as under:

Particulars Rs.

Amount Income Rs.

6,000/- Future Prospects 40% Rs.

2,400/- Total Rs.

8,400/- Dependency (2 dependents) - 1/2 Rs.

4,200/- Multiplier 15 (4,200 X 12 X 15) Rs.

7,56,000/- Consortium (48,000 X 2) Rs.

96,000/- Funeral Expenses Rs.

18,000/- Loss of Estate Rs.

18,000/- Total Rs.

8,88,000/- Compensation awarded by Tribunal Rs.

11,40,000/- Refund amount Rs.

2,52,000/- 7.

In view of above, I pass following order:

ORDER

i.

The appeal is allowed.

ii.

Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 /claimants are entitled for amount of Rs.8,88,000/- @7.5% interest per annum from date of filing claim petition till realisation. iii.

The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 / claimants shall deposit the refund amount of Rs.2,52,000/- along with 3/4

accrued interest thereon before the Tribunal within six weeks from the receipt of the order.

iv.

The claimants are permitted to withdraw the amount deposited by the respondents along with accrued interest thereon.

8.

The appeal is disposed of. All pending applications if any also disposed of.

(R. M. JOSHI, J.) 4/4