Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.66 seconds)
Documents citing Zahid Khan vs Arun Mandal & Ors. on 24 February, 2015

The Oriental Insurance Company ... vs Pamarthi Gangadhara Rao on 27 September, 2022

26. The Tribunal after considering the evidence of the claimant and P.W-4, awarded a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- against the claim of Rs.4,65,000/- for the expenditure incurred for artificial limb, and Tribunal relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Zahir Khan Vs. Arun Mandal7 on this aspect. The Tribunal did not award any amount towards attendant charges on the ground that the claimant did not prove his claim for the attendant charges.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Satender & Ors. on 14 July, 2023

He also relied upon the decision of this Court in Zahid Khan Vs Arun Mandal, reported as 2015 SCC Online Del 7606, to contend that the Respondent/ Injured was only 27 years old when the accident took place, so keeping in mind his young age at the time of accident, the learned Claims Tribunal should have granted the compensation for procuring artificial limb and at least one replacement of the same.
Delhi High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Krishna Sobti vs State on 17 May, 2016

To support this proposition that the rule of per incuriam would become applicable in the factual scenario of the instant case, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon AIR 2014 SC 1745 Sundeep Kumar Bafna Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr., C.R.P. No.192/2015 Page 3 of 13 (2014) 7 SCC 340 Union of India & Others Vs. R.P. Singh and 2015 Lawsuit (Del) 913 Zahid Khan Vs. Arun Mandal & Ors.
Delhi High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 1 - I Kaur - Full Document

Jeet Kaur vs Shri Balister Singh (Driver) on 12 August, 2016

In Zahid Khan Vs. Arun Mandal and others, 2016 ACJ 1142 in which injured was labourer and suffered 85% permanent disablement due to amputation of right leg, Rs. 100,000/- was awarded as pain and suffering, Rs. 1,50,000/- for loss of amenities, Rs. 1,75,000/- for amputation of leg and disfigurement, Rs. 200,000/- for artificial limb and Rs. 200,000/- for future medical and other expenses.
Delhi District Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mangal vs Ranjit Dass on 29 August, 2016

In Zahid Khan Vs. Arun Mandal and others, 2016 ACJ 1142 in which injured was labourer and suffered 85% permanent disablement due to amputation of right leg, Rs. 100,000/- was awarded as pain and suffering, Rs. 1,50,000/- for loss of amenities, Rs. 1,75,000/- for amputation of leg and disfigurement, Rs. 200,000/- for artificial limb and Rs. 200,000/- for future medical and other expenses. Accordingly, compensation is calculated as below:
Delhi District Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Priti Gupta @ Poonam Rani vs Shri Sachin Pal (Driver) on 22 September, 2016

In Zahid Khan Vs. Arun Mandal and others, 2016 ACJ 1142 in which injured was labourer and suffered 85% permanent disablement due to amputation of right leg, Rs. 100,000/- was awarded as pain and suffering, Rs. 1,50,000/- for loss of amenities, Rs. 1,75,000/- for amputation of leg and disfigurement, Rs. 200,000/- for artificial limb and Rs. 200,000/- for future medical and other expenses.
Delhi District Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Hridaya Nagaria vs Jai Kishan (Driver) on 28 October, 2016

In Zahid Khan Vs. Arun Mandal and others, 2016 ACJ 1142 in which injured was labourer and suffered 85% permanent disablement due to amputation of right leg, Rs. 100,000/- was awarded as MACT no. 205/13 Ms. Kiran Bansal Page no. 6/9 pain and suffering, Rs. 1,50,000/- for loss of amenities, Rs. 1,75,000/- for amputation of leg and disfigurement, Rs. 200,000/- for artificial limb and Rs. 200,000/- for future medical and other expenses.
Delhi District Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1