Bombay High Court
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.THR.ITS MANAGER, MR.S.KUMARAVELANversusSHRI.ASHOK MAHADEV PATIL AND ORS.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Dismissed
Holding
The tribunal's order is upheld; the multiplier must be based on the deceased's age and the monthly income figure is correct.
Summary
The United India Insurance Company appealed a tribunal order that awarded Rs. 24,32,240 with interest to Ashok Mahadev Patil and others. The insurer argued that the multiplier for compensation should be based on the parents' ages rather than the deceased's age, citing a later decision, but the court held that the tribunal correctly used the deceased's age. The insurer also contended that the tribunal had overestimated the monthly income at Rs. 11,309, yet the salary slip supporting this figure was undisputed. The court found no error in the tribunal's reasoning on either point. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed and the original award, after any adjustments, was to be paid to the claimants.
Issues considered
- Whether the multiplier for compensation should be calculated using the age of the deceased or the age of the parents.
- Whether the monthly income of Rs. 11,309 used by the tribunal is excessive.
Subjects
- insurance
- compensation
- multiplier
- monthly income
- tribunal
- appeal
- civil procedure
Judgment
Sneha Bang 1 11.FA-207-2019.doc
Digitally
signed by
SNEHA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SNEHA JAYPRAKASH
JAYPRAKASH BANG
BANG Date:
2026.06.22
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
18:38:36
+0530
FIRST APPEAL NO. 207 OF 2019
United India Insurance Company Ltd.
Thr. Its Manager, Mr. S. Kumaravelan …. Appellant
Versus
Ashok Mahadev Patil & Ors. .… Respondents
__________________________________________________________________
Mr. Nikhil Mehta i/b. KMC Legal Venture for the Appellant.
None for the Respondents.
__________________________________________________________________
CORAM : JITENDRA JAIN, J.
DATED : 22nd JUNE 2026
P. C. :
1. The present appeal is filed by the insurance company challenging
order of the Tribunal dated 5th April, 2017 whereby compensation of Rs.
24,32,240/- alongwith interest was awarded.
2. The first contention raised by the learned counsel for the insurance
company is that for the purpose of the multiplyer, age of the parents should
be considered and not the age of the deceased. This is now no more res
integra in the light of the decision in the case of National Insurance
Company vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors.1. The age of the deceased should be
considered and has been rightly considered by the Tribunal. Therefore, no
fault can be found in the Tribunal’s order.
3. The second submission made by the learned counsel for the
insurance company is that the monthly income Rs.11,309/- taken by the
1 (2017) 16 SCC 680
Sneha Bang 2 11.FA-207-2019.doc
Tribunal is on the higher side. The said submission has considered the
figure of Rs. 11,309/- based on the salary slip which was exhibited as
Exh.42. The salary slip has not been disputed. In the light of this fact, the
contention raised that the monthly income considered by the Tribunal is on
the higher side cannot be accepted.
4. Since on both these ground no fault can be found in the Tribunal’s
order, the appeal of the insurance company is dismissed.
5. Statutory deposit of Rs. 25,000/- to be transferred to the concerned
Tribunal and the parties to make application for the refund of the same.
6. The original amount awarded alongwith interest should be paid over
to the claimant after considering any amount withdrawn.
7. Appeal is dismissed.
[ JITENDRA JAIN, J. ]
Checking your session…