Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sukun Kiratchit Bage And ANR.

Shubhada S Kadam 9-IA-13791-2025 (C).doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1592 of 2025 Shriram General Insurance Co.Ltd ... Appellant/s versus Sukun Kiratchit Bage and anr.

.... Respondent/s Ms. Shalini Shankar, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr. T. R. Kale along with Ms. Asha Landge, Advocate for Respondent No.1.

CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.

DATE : 8th DECEMBER, 2025.

P.C. :

1.

This appeal takes exception to the judgment and award dated 30th June 2025 passed in M.A.C.P.No. 412 of 2023 essentially on the ground of excessive compensation granted by the Tribunal. 2.

Learned counsel for the appellant/Insurer submits that without the proof of income, the Tribunal granted compensation, which is exorbitant.

3.

Learned counsel for the claimants submits that notional income of Rs.15,000/- is accepted by the Tribunal, which is reasonable. Apart from this, it is his submission that the Tribunal ought to have granted Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date:

2025.12.10 18:52:27 +0530 compensation for adverse effect on the marital prospects of the claimant. SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM 4.

As far as the income of the claimant, the Tribunal has 1/2

Shubhada S Kadam 9-IA-13791-2025 (C).doc accepted the notional income @ Rs.15,000/- per month. In the facts of the case, the said assessment is correct. There is no dispute about the other particulars on the basis of which the compensation has been derived by the Tribunal. This Court, therefore, finds no substance to the challenge to the impugned judgment and award on this count. 5.

In so far as the contention of the claimant about the adverse effect on his marital prospects is concerned, at the first place, the claimant never states in his claim petition or in his evidence before the Court on oath that he is unmarried. Secondly, only cross-examination is sought to be relied upon by the counsel for the claimant indicating that he resides with his parents. In considered view of this Court, the said crossexamination does not show that he is unmarried. Hence, claim under the said head cannot be accepted.

6.

In view of above discussion, appeal stands dismissed. 7.

Interim Applications pending, if any, stand disposed of. (R. M. JOSHI, J.) 2/2