Bombay High Court

RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSMITA AMIT KOTHALE AND ORS.

Disposal: Allowed

Holding

The court held that the delay in filing the appeal was condoned and that the claimants were entitled to receive 60% of the deposited compensation amount with interest, subject to an undertaking, with the balance to be invested.

Summary

The insurance company filed an appeal 68 days late, seeking condonation of the delay, which the court granted after finding no mala fides. The claimants, whose breadwinner died in an accident, applied to withdraw Rs. 80,23,576 deposited by the insurer, arguing urgent need for compensation. The insurer contested, claiming the tribunal's income assessment was vulnerable and the amount excessive. The court partially allowed the withdrawal, permitting the claimants to receive 60% of the deposited amount with accrued interest upon furnishing an undertaking, while directing the balance to be invested in a nationalized bank. The first appeal was admitted and the interim applications were disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether a delay of 68 days in filing the appeal can be condoned.
Whether the deposited compensation amount can be partially released to the claimants pending the outcome of the appeal.

Subjects

delay condonation
interim application
compensation withdrawal
insurance claim
partial release of funds
civil appeal
procedural law

Judgment

                                                             29 IA 237 OF 2026+.odt

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                 29 INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 237 OF 2026
                                   IN
                     FIRST APPEALST NO. 1482 OF 2026
                                 WITH
                  INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1566 OF 2026
                                   IN
                     FIRST APPEALST NO. 1482 OF 2026


                   RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
                                   VERSUS
                       SMITA AMIT KOTHALE AND ORS.
                                      ...
     Advocate for Appellant/Insurance Company : Mr. Aditya Ghadge h/f Mr.
                                Akshay Kulkarni
       Advocate for Respondents/Claimants nos. 1 to 5 : Mr. R.S. Alange
                                       ...
                       CORAM               : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.

                       DATE                   : 07.10.2026


PER COURT :

      INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 237/2026 FOR DELAY CONDONATION :

1.      The applicant seeks to condone delay of 68 days.

2.      It is contended that there are no mala fides on the part of the
applicant in preferring the appeal belatedly.

3.      The application is contested by the respondents/claimants.

4.      There is no reason to infer any mala fides on the part of the applicant
in preferring the appeal belatedly. For the reasons stated in the application,
the delay stands condoned.

5.      Interim Application is disposed of.

                                                                               1/3
                                                           29 IA 237 OF 2026+.odt

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1566/2026 FOR WITHDRAWAL OF AMOUNT :

6.    Heard both sides.

7.    The applicants seek to withdraw amount of Rs. 80,23,576/- deposited
by the respondent-Insurance Company.

8.    It is contended that in an accident bread earner lost his life and
dependents are in dire need of money. It is submitted that there is cogent
material placed on record and the compensation is reasonable and just.

9.    The counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company would submit
that the income considered by the Tribunal is vulnerable. The exorbitant
amount is fixed by the Tribunal. The respondent has every hope of success
in the first appeal.

10.   The factum of death of Amit in the accident is undisputed. Perusal of
the impugned judgment and award would show that after considering the
material on record the quantum is arrived at.         The grievance of the
respondent-Insurance Company is mainly pertains to the income.             It is
unreasonable to withhold the amount of compensation in its entirety.

11.   The applicants have not been disbursed any amount after the
impugned judgment. The need expressed by them cannot be discarded.
Ends of justice would be met in permitting them to receive 60% of the
deposited amount of compensation with accrued interest.

12.   Interim Application is partly allowed, permitting the applicants to
receive 60% of the amount deposited with accrued interest on furnishing
undertaking to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer of the jurisdictional
Tribunal. The Balance amount shall be invested in any nationalized bank.

FIRST APPEAL :

13.   Admit.
                                                                             2/3
                                                               29 IA 237 OF 2026+.odt

14.     Learned   counsel   Mr.    R.   S.   Alange   waives   service    for    the
respondents/claimant nos.1 to 5.

15.     Call for record and proceedings.

16.     Print is dispensed with.

18.     Parties shall be at liberty to tender on record private paper book or
compilation of documents.




                                         ( SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.)




mkd/-




                                                                                 3/3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…