The Bombay High Court as of late held that remarriage of a widow can’t be a ground for denying her compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act [Iffco Tokio General Insurance Agency vs Bhagyashri Gaikwad].
Single-judge Justice SG Dige turned down the contention of the insurance agency that a widow, assuming that she remarries, ought to be prevented compensation of demise of her most memorable spouse.
“One can’t expect that for getting compensation of perished spouse, the widow needs to remain widow for life time or till getting compensation. Thinking of her as age, and at the hour of mishap, she was spouse of expired, is adequate ground that she is entitled for the compensation.
Also after death of spouse remarriage can not be a no to get a pay,” The Court held in the order passed on March 3.
The bench was seized of a plea filed by the Iffco Tokio General Insurance Agency testing the request for an Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (MACT) by which the firm was held at risk to repay the respondent spouse of one Ganesh, who died in a mishap in May 2010.
According to current realities of the case, the lady’s husband Ganesh, was going on an motor cycle as a pillion rider when the bike hit an auto rikshaw which was being drive in a rash and careless way. He passed away while he was being dealt with.
At the hour of death of her husband, the claimant-wife was 19 years of age. From that point, she filed a claim petition for compensation. During pendency of the appeal she re-wedded. The insurance agency featured this as a ground to deny pay.
It likewise battled that it can’t be held at risk to pay the remuneration as the autorickshaw was simply allowed to utilize inside Thane region. Be that as it may, Justice Dige dismissed both the contentions.
“In my view the organization have not analyzed any observer to demonstrate that taking culpable rikshaw outside the jurisdiction of Thane region was break of terms of grant, and it amounts to breach of terms and conditions of insurance policy.
Consequently, I don’t see merit in the conflict that there was breach of terms and conditions of insurance contract.” With these perceptions, the bench dismissed the organization’s plea.
Advocates Vikrant Purashurami and Rama Naik showed up for the Appellant.
Advocate Uday B Nighot addressed the Respondents.
By:- Yuvraj Sachdeva BA+LLB(2nd Semester) RNB Global University
0 Comments