Bombay High Court

NAMDEO TUKARAM KALE AND ANRversusSANJAY SUBHASHCHANDRAJI BAGADIYA AND ANR

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise pursis.

Summary

The dispute between Namdeo Tukaram Kale (appellant) and Sanjay Bagadiya (respondent) was referred to the Lok Adalat, where both parties submitted a compromise pursis. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant No.1 died, leaving only the legal heir of appellant No.2. The appellant appeared via video conferencing and agreed to personal verification. The Lok Adalat panel accepted the compromise, ordering the respondent to deposit Rs.4,00,000 to the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal within 60 days and directing a refund of court fees to the appellant. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of in accordance with the settlement.

Subjects

Lok Adalat
settlement
compromise pursis
motor accident claim
court fee refund

Judgment

       BEFORE THE LOK ADALAT HELD AT HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

      Organized by High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Aurangabad
under section 19, of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (Central Act)

                       FIRST APPEAL NO.1082 OF 2010

                         Namdeo Tukaram Kale & Anr.
                                   Versus
                           Sanjay Bagadiya & Anr.
                                   _____

Mr. Manisha Dhule, Advocate for the Appellant.
Mr. Aniruddha Usmanpurkar, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
Mr. Dinesh Bankar, Manager/Authorized Signatory (present).
Ms. Chincholabai Namdeo Kale (Appellant/Claimant No.2) through V. C.

Name of Hon’ble High Court Judge: SHRI. ABASAHEB D. SHINDE

Retired Judicial Officer: SHRI. KISHOR R. CHAUDHARI

Name of Member : SHRI. S. K. KADAM

                                     AWARD


1.   Not on board. Taken on board.



2.   The dispute between the parties having been referred for determination to

     the Lok Adalat.



3.   The appellant and respondent No.2 tendered a compromise pursis, which is

     taken on record and marked “Exhibit -R-1” for the purpose of identification.
4.   The appellant No.1, Father of the Deceased, died during the pendency of

     this appeal, leaving behind only the legal heir of appellant No.2.



5.   The appellant No.2 appears through video conferencing and is ready to

     appear personally on 15 September 2026 between 2.30 p.m. to 3.00 p.m.

     for the purpose of personal verification before the Registrar (Judicial).



6.   The dispute between appellant and respondent No.2 is settled in terms of

     the settlement mentioned in paragraph No.4 of the compromise pursis.

     Hence, the following order:


                                     ORDER


     (i) The present appeal No. 1082 of 2010 stands disposed of in terms of

       compromise pursis.

     (ii) The respondent No.2 is ready to deposit the amount of Rs.4,00,000/-

       towards full and final satisfaction of the claim amount before Motor

       Accident Claim Tribunal, Hingoli, within 60 days from the date of receipt

       of the certified copy of this order.

     (iii) Mr. Usmanpurkar, learned advocate, makes a statement that he will

       receive the certified copy immediately i.e., within a period of two weeks

       from today.
      (iv) The appellant is entitled to receive refund of Court fees as per rules.

      (v) Award be prepared accordingly.


7.    The proceeding stands closed.




     (S. K. Kadam)       (Kishor R. Chaudhari)        (Abasaheb D. Shinde, J.)
        Member           District Judge (Retired)        Head of the Panel




 Date:12.09.2026

                                    (Seal of the Authority/Committee)

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…