Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 62 (0.39 seconds)
Documents citing United India Insurance Co.Ltd vs Sube Singh And Others on 15 January, 2014

Manphool & Ors vs Anil & Ors on 14 March, 2018

and "it would not be unreasonable to estimate her contribution in that case at a higher figure than a skilled worker". Agreeing with the observation of Co-ordinate Bench, I take value of contribution of deceased towards her family equivalent to highly skilled worker and assessed her notional income keeping in view the minimum wages prescribed for highly skilled worker as `5200/- per month.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 1 - S Gupta - Full Document

Sunder Singh And Ors vs Angrej Singh And Ors on 3 April, 2018

In support of his contention, he has relied upon judgment of this Court United India Insurance Company Limited vs. Sube Singh and others FAO No. 218 of 2014 decided on 15.1.2014 that stood affirmed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 14334 of 2014 (United India Insurance Company Limited vs. Sube Singh and others) decided on 8.9.2014.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - R Mittal - Full Document

Shriram General Insurance Comp. Ltd vs Leelu Ram And Ors on 16 April, 2018

The application for compensation has been filed by husband and son of the deceased who appears to be major. The occurrence in question took place on 29.7.2015. Taking a clue from the judgment passed by this court in United India Insurance Company Limited vs. Sube Singh and others FAO No. 218 of 2014 decided on 15.1.2014 that stood affirmed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 14334 of 2014 (United India Insurance Company Limited vs. Sube Singh and others) decided on 8.9.2014, value of services of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal is affirmed. However, claimants shall not be entitled to any addition in income for future prospects particularly in the circumstances that no deduction for personal expenses would be made. The Tribunal has applied correct multiplier. In this manner, loss of dependency comes to Rs. 10,000 x12x16= Rs.19,20,000/-.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R Mittal - Full Document

Hemlata & Ors vs General Manager Haryana Roadways And ... on 11 December, 2019

6. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties and found that the impugned award passed by the Tribunal needs to be modified to the extent that the claimants would also be entitled for the enhanced income of the deceased i.e. `9000/- per month instead of `5000/- as allowed by the Coordinate Bench in 'United India Insurance Company Limited vs. Sube Singh and Others' in FAO-218-2014 decided on 15.01.2014. The role of a 3 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 23-12-2019 08:30:31 ::: FAO No. 7853 of 2017 4 housewife can not be diminished. Apart from being a home maker, she also performs multifarious tasks for which she is not paid. Insofar as deduction of 1/3rd is concerned, this Court in FAO No. 3310 of 2012 titled Paramjit Singh and another Versus Dilbagh Singh alias Bagga and others decided on 16.5.2013, held that while calculating the notional income of a housewife, the entire income should be taken as dependency of the legal heirs without applying any cut much-less 1/3rd as has been done in certain cases.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - J Thakur - Full Document

Tata Aig General Insurance Co. Ltd vs Karamvir And Others on 7 November, 2019

The application for compensation has been filed by husband and two minor children namely Mansi aged 8 years and Ansh 5 years. The Tribunal has rightly held that services of a house-maker deserves to be given more value than minimum wage of a skilled labour. A house-maker has multifarious duties to perform and is available to the family round the clock. This Court in United India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sube Singh, FAO No.218 of 2014, decided on 15.01.2014 has affirmed findings of the Tribunal valuing services of a house-maker at Rs.9000/- per month who died in the year 2012 and the same were affirmed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court. In the given circumstances, I do not find any reason to intervene in assessment of value of services of the deceased.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - R Mittal - Full Document

Nancy & Ors vs Sudhir & Ors on 16 August, 2018

Counsel for the appellants has argued that the Tribunal has correctly assessed the income of the deceased as part-time legal worker as Rs.2000/- p.m. but has erred in taking her contribution as a house-wife only @ Rs.3000/- p.m. As per him, in this case the accident had taken place in the year 2014 and in the matter of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Sube Singh and others, passed in FAO No.218 of 2014, decided on 15.01.2014, this Court had upheld the contribution of a home maker to be 1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 06-10-2018 23:39:51 ::: FAO-6874-2015 (O&M) -2- Rs.9000/- p.m and against that judgment SLP No.24916 of 2014 titled as United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Sube Singh and others was also dismissed by the Supreme Court on 08.09.2014.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mohinder Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 3 May, 2019

16. For the assessment of monthly income of the deceased, reliance may be placed on judgment rendered by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in FAO No. 218 of 2014, titled as 'United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Sube Singh and others' decided on 15.01.2014, wherein it has been held that a house wife has to be considered to be at higher level than a mere skilled worker and it would not be unreasonable to hold her monthly income at a higher figure. The said judgment was challenged in an SLP which was dismissed and has since attained finality. In my opinion, it would be fair and reasonable to assess the 5 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 09-06-2019 03:20:35 ::: CWP No. 4222 of 2015 (O&M) -6- income of Jaspreet Kaur @ Rs.9,000/- per month.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - A Monga - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 Next