|
|
Motor Vehicles Act,1988 - Motor Accident Claim Insurance Company liable - Compensation to passengers - Travelling in a public transport - Breach of conditions of permit - Insurance policy sitting capacity six persons including driver - Vehicle carrying fifteen passengers - Fell into a ditch - Death majority of passengers - Causing serious injuries - Remaining passengers claim lodged - Tribunal directed - Insurance Co pay compensation to claimants - High court confirmed - Appeal - Liability of the insurer - Confined to number of persons covered by insurance policy - Not beyond the same persons travelling in excess - Entitled compensated by owner - Entitled compensation from insurer recover from owner -Insurance Co deposit total amount awarded - Entitled to recover excess of its liability from owner by execution - Appeals disposed.
Found In: Topic Index, Subject Index, Judgement
|
|
Motor Vehicles Act,1988 - Motor Accident Claim Motor Accident claim - Appellant/claimant going on motorcycle - Seating on pillion seat - Another scooter from wrong side hit the right leg of the appellant - Result she fell down - Right leg fractured received multiple injuries - Claim - Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.1,36,547/- with 9% interest - High Court set aside - Appeal - Appellant have 32% permanent disability - Leg was shortened by two inch - Disability certificate was proved - Supreme Court - Complaint is not disputed - Decision of Tribunal cannot be reversed on ground - Nobody came from office of SSP to prove complaint - In a road accident claim - Strict principles of proof in a criminal case are not attracted - Impugned judgment of High Court quashed - Tribunal awarded restored - Appeal allowed.
Found In: Topic Index, Subject Index, Judgement
|
|
Motor Vehicles Act,1988 - Motor Accident Claim Motor Accident Claim - Compensation - Determination of amount - High Court - Partly allowed the appeal filed by the Insurance Company and reduced the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head "loss of earnings" from Rs.5,00,000/- to Rs.2,60,000/- - Evidence on record showed that apart from the monthly salary of Rs.2500/- - Deceased was getting Rs.50/- as daily allowance - Appeal - Tribunal was right in assessing the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.4,000/- - On applying the multiplier of 15 - Court fixed the amount of compensation receivable by the appellants under the head "loss of earnings" at Rs.4,50,000/- - Appeal allowed - No cost.
Found In: Topic Index, Subject Index, Judgement
|
|
Motor Vehicles Act,1988 - Motor Accident Claim Motor Accident Claim - Extent of disability - Injured in a motor accident - Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.94,700/-, with interest at 9% per annum - Appeal -Increase in compensation - High Court - Rejected - Appeal - Tribunal proceeded on basis permanent disability 45% - Loss of his future earning capacity also 45% - Tribunal overlooked the fact - Disability certificate referred to 45% disability to left lower limb - Not in regard to the entire body - Permanent disability of the limb could not considered to functional disability of the body nor could be assumed - Result in a corresponding extent of loss of earning capacity - As the disability would not have prevented from carrying on his avocation as a cheese vendor- It might impede in his smooth functioning - While assessing - Permanent functional disability of body as 25%-loss of future earning capacity as 20% -Court increased the compensation by Rs.20,000/- with interest rate awarded by the Tribunal - Appeal partly allowed.
Found In: Topic Index, Subject Index, Judgement
|
|
Motor Vehicles Act,1988 - Section 166 Motor Accident Claim - For sustaining permanent disability - Enhancement of compensation under the head loss of amenities and enjoyment of life and loss of earnings during the laid up period - Held, High Court failed to give sufficient reasons for taking said view - High Court was acting as a Court of first appeal - And was expected to properly analyses the evidence on record before coming to a finding - Leading cases referred - Impugned judgment of the High Court set aside - Matter remanded back to the High Court for decision afresh in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in its various cases - High Court directed to decide the appeal expeditiously - Appeal allowed
Found In: Topic Index, Judgement
|
|
Motor Vehicles Act,1988 - Motor Accident Claim Motor Accident Claim - Petition filed for - The Tribunal awarded a lump sum amount of Rs.50,000/- to the claimant with simple interest @ 12% p.a. High Court increased the disability compensation from Rs. 50,000/- to Rs.1,10,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. on the additional amount - Appeal - Enhancement of compensation - The Supreme Court directed the respondents to pay an additional sum of Rs. 1,10,000/- to the appellants to adequately and properly compensate them under the heads (i) `expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing food and miscellaneous expenditure' and (ii) `future medical expenses' with simple interest @ 7% p.a. on the additional amount - Appeal allowed.
Found In: Subject Index
|
|
Motor Vehicles Act,1988 - Motor Accident Claim Claimant a pillion rider of a motor cycle met with an accident due to oil spill on the road - Claimant and driver sustained injuries - Both treated in hospital - Vehicle was insured - Tribunal quantified compensation payable by the Insurance Company at a sum of '3,50,000/- - Aggrieved claimant preferred appeal before High Court enhanced compensation to '4,90,000/- from '3,50,000/- - This judgment and order called in question in appeal - Supreme Court - Held -We do not intend to disturb judgment and order passed by High Court except to a limited extent - It is no doubt true that while making assessment - There is an element of guess work - The Court has the discretion to accept either totally or partially or reject Certificate so produced and marked in trial - Appeal partly allowed.
Found In: Subject Index
|
|
Motor Vehicles Act,1988 - Motor Accident Claim Motor Accident Claim - Compensation - Tribunal found the claimant's son died in accident - Caused by the bus and the truck - Negligent driving by the drivers of the vehicles - Computed compensation to Rs. 60,000/- - After adjusting Rs. 25,000/- which was paid to claimant towards no fault liability - Held - Claimant was entitled to further sum of Rs. 35,000/- and-simple interest @ 10% p.a - High Court - Confirmed - Appeal for enhancement - Deceased was 22 year old and not married - Evidence showed deceased was in forest department -Court enhanced compensation to Rs. 1,32,000/- paid by insurance companies with the simple interest of 10% per annum - Appeal allowed.
Found In: Subject Index, Judgement
|
|
Motor Vehicles Act,1988 - Section 140 , Section 166 Victim met with motor accident- Rash and negligent reversing of the truck driver - Tribunal and High Court rejected the claim - Ground - FIR of the incident lodged belatedly -Appellant failed to establish -Fateful day said truck was involved in motor road accident- Causing injuries to him - Appeal - Whether delay in lodging the FIR of accident- Could prove fatal - Result into dismissal of Claim Petition - Accident on 7.10.2023 - FIR lodged by Appellant's father on 26.1.2024 - Appellant's father gave exact and vivid description of accident -Injuries sustained by his son - Even the owner of the vehicle- Admitted -His vehicle met with an accident on 7.10.2023 - He was intimated on phone very same day- Amply proved - Truck was involved in road accident - Delay in lodging FIR satisfactory explained - Certificate by Medical Board - Clearly established -Permanent disability to the extent of 50% - After several surgeries - Not able to control his urination - Respondents are directed - Jointly & severally - Rs.2.5 lac compensation with interest @ 6% p.a. to appellant - Claim petition allowed.
Found In: Judgement
|
|
Motor Vehicles Act,1988 - Section 166 Claim petition - Deceased walking along - Side of National Highway - Lorry driven rashly suddenly hit him - Died on the spot - Tribunal view of the rash and negligent driving - Awarded a compensation of Rs.1,71,600/- with interest @ 12% p.a. cost of Rs.1,500/- to claimants - High Court - Reduced compensation to Rs.85,000/- interest @ 12% p.a. - Appeal - Supreme Court - High Court should have proceeded to compute the compensation on the age of the deceased - Order of High Court set aside - Tribunal restored - Appeal allowed - No costs.
Found In: Judgement
|
|
Topic Found (20)
|
|
ILC-2012-SC-MAC-Jan-1
Motor Accident Claim
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Aug-2
Rash and negligent driving, Motor Accident Claim
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Aug-1
Motor Accident Claim, Loss of earnings or earning capacity
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Apr-6
Motor Accident Claim
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-May-2
Motor Accident Claim, Contributory negligence
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-May-1
Motor Accident Claim, Quantum of compensation
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Feb-6
Motor Accident Claim
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Mar-3
Motor accident claim
|
|
ILC-2010-SC-MAC-Nov-1
Motor Accident Claim, Compensation, Determination of amount ,
|
|
ILC-2010-SC-MAC-Oct-1
Motor Accident Claim, Extent of disability, Permanent disability
|
|
ILC-2010-SC-MAC-Aug-7
Motor Accident Claim, Sustaining permanent disability, Enhancement of compensation
|
|
ILC-2010-SC-MAC-Aug-6
Determination of just compensation
|
|
ILC-2010-SC-MAC-Aug-2
No-fault liability, Compensation, True nature and character
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Mar-2
Motor Accident Claim, Repudiation of claim, Vehicle insurance
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Feb-5
Motor Accident Claim, Insurance Company liable
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Mar-1
Motor accident claim
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Jan-4
Motor Accident claim
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Feb-3
Rash and negligent driving, FIR lodged belatedly
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Feb-2
Rash and negligent driving
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Jan-1
Compensation
|
Imp. Decisions Found (15)
|
|
ILC-2012-SC-MAC-Jan-1
MAC - Enhancing the compensation - At the age of 55, alternative job is not possible - Additional compensation at the rate of 9% p.a.
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Aug-2
MAC - S. 173, 166 - At time of accident deceased was 28 years in terms of ratio of judgment in Sarla Verma's case amount of compensation payable is required to be determined by applying multiplier of 17.
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Aug-1
MAC - S.166 - "Disability", as so used, ordinarily means loss or impairment of earning power and has been held not to mean loss of a member of the body.
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Apr-6
MAC - In case where an unmarried young man dies, the average age of the parents will be taken for determining the multiplier and not the age of the deceased.
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-May-1
Doctors, show that the appellant had disability to the extent of 90% - Tribunal was fully justified in granting a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- towards permanent disability.
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Feb-6
MAC - Reduction in compensation without any justification is arbitrary set aside.
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Mar-3
Appellant/Injured consumed alcohol - Not mean - Driver of vehicle not need to drive the vehicle cautiously.
Whole body disability 29% - Cannot work as a coolie or do any other manual work.
|
|
ILC-2010-SC-MAC-Nov-3
Deceased was 22 year old and not married - Compensation award.
|
|
ILC-2010-SC-MAC-Oct-1
Extent of disability - Functional disability of the body nor could be assumed.
|
|
ILC-2010-SC-MAC-Aug-6
Applied multiplier - Guidelines laid down in Susamma Thomas case.
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Mar-2
Duplicate licence issued by same licensing Authority cannot be challenged that original licence was fake.
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Feb-5
Insurance Company entitled to recover excess of its liability from owner by execution.
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Mar-1
Clearly proved number of vehicle - Not mentioned in FIR - Compensation award
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Jan-4
MAC - Road accident - Strict principles of proof in a criminal case are not attracted.
|
|
ILC-2011-SC-MAC-Jan-1
Death of a victim caused by the fire and explosion of the petrol tanker is a result of an accident arising out of the use of the motor vehicle.
|
|