UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITEDversusTHUMMALA PALLI KAVITA and ORS

                                                     1-FA-557-12.DOCX


                                                                      rsk
         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                  FIRST APPEAL NO.557 OF 2012

United India Insurance Company
Limited                                    ...Appellant
                                           (Original Opponent No.3)
Versus

Thummala Palli Kavita And Ors              ...Respondents
                                           (Original Claimants)

                              WITH
              CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1463 OF 2012
                              WITH
            CIVIL APPLICATION (L) NO.1431 OF 2011
                                IN
                  FIRST APPEAL NO.557 OF 2012
                               -----
Mr. Nikhil Mehta i/b KMC Legal Venture for the Appellant and for
the Applicant in CAF No.1431/2011
Ms. Aastha Dadhiea i/b Mr. Prasad Kulkarni for the Respondent
No.2 to 4 in FA and for the Applicant in CAF No.1463/2012.
                               -----

                          CORAM : Jitendra Jain, J.

                           DATED : 8 April 2026
PC:-



CIVIL APPLICATION (L) NO.1431 OF 2011
1.     Learned counsel for the Insurance Company states that they
have deposited the decretal amount with the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal (MACT). Accepting the said submission, the
operation of the impugned order dated 19 October 2010 is stayed
till the final disposal of the appeal.
2.     Civil Application is disposed of.


                               Page 1 of 4
                                                 1-FA-557-12.DOCX




FIRST APPEAL NO.557 OF 2012
3.    The present appeal is filed by the Insurance Company
challenging order of the MACT dated 19 October 2010. By consent
the appeal is taken up for hearing finally.
4.    On 25 August 2000, Mr. Thummala Palli Ravi, an employee
of Ispat Industries Limited having factory at Pen alongwith other
colleagues, was waiting to catch the MSRTC bus to go to the
factory. However, since they were not able to board the MSRTC
bus, they preferred to travel by a Tata Sumo vehicle proceeding
towards Panvel on hire basis.
5.    The Tata Sumo vehicle dashed with the truck from backside
resulting in a fatal accident and the death of Mr. Ravi alongwith
other persons.
6.    An FIR came to be lodged against the driver of Tata Sumo
Vehicle .
7.    The dependents of the deceased filed an application for
compensation with the MACT and the Tribunal on 19 October
2010 ordered payment of Rs.43,07,000/- alongwith interest @
7.5% from the date of application till realization of the amount.
8.    I have heard Mr. Mehta learned counsel for the Insurance
Company and Ms. Dadhiea, learned counsel for the original
claimants.
9.    Mr. Mehta’s first contention is that the original claimants
have received certain amount from the employer of the deceased
and that amount should have been deducted by the Tribunal
while awarding the compensation.
10.   In my view, this issue is now no more res integra in the light
of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mrs.


                              Page 2 of 4
                                                    1-FA-557-12.DOCX


Helen C. Rebello And Ors. Vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport
Corporation,1 wherein it has been held that the amounts received
after the death       from the employer cannot be reduced while
arriving at the amount of compensation to be awarded by the
MACT. Therefore, in my view, the submission made on behalf of
the Insurance Company on this issue cannot be accepted.
11.       The second contention raised by Mr. Mehta, learned counsel
for the appellant-Insurance Company is that Tata Sumo vehicle
was used for hire and therefore, there was breach of conditions of
the policy.
12.       Insofar as this issue is concerned, the Tribunal has given a
finding that the Insurance Company has accepted a higher
premium since the vehicle was to be used as a tourist vehicle. In
my view, if that be so then the contention raised for challenging
the impugned order that the vehicle was used for hire is contrary
to the terms and conditions of the policy cannot be accepted.
Even the tourist vehicle is used by hiring the same by other
passengers. Therefore, in my view there is no breach of terms and
conditions of the Insurance policy when the vehicle was used for
hiring on payment basis by the deceased. Therefore, even this
contention cannot be accepted.
13.       In view of above, I do not see any infirmity in the order
passed by the Tribunal who has rightly relied upon the decision of
the Hon’ble Supreme Court while               awarding compensation.
Therefore, appeal is dismissed.
14.       The statutory deposit of Rs.25,000/- alongwith accrued
interest, if any, to be transferred to the MACT, Alibaug         with
liberty to the parties to apply for payment of the same. The

1
    1999 (1) SCC 90



                                Page 3 of 4
                                                1-FA-557-12.DOCX


original claimants are entitled to the decretal amount deposited
by the Insurance Company with the MACT, Alibaug alongwith
interest accrued thereon.
15.   Appeal is disposed of. All pending Civil/Interim Applications
do not survive.


                                                 (Jitendra Jain, J)




                             Page 4 of 4