Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.49 seconds)
Documents citing Amati Hymavathi And Anr. vs Nissankararao Srikrishnamurthy And ... on 21 January, 1998

United India Insurance Company Ltd. ... vs S. Ajith, M.S. Geetha, M.K. Soman And N. ... on 31 July, 2002

In the decision reported in Amati Hymavathi v. Nissankararao Srikrishnamurthy (AIR 1998 Andhra Pradesh 345) a Single Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court followed the above decision of this court and after elaborate consideration of various other decisions, laid down the following guidelines for the guidance of the Tribunal and the Courts in paragraph 37 of the judgment.
Kerala High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 2 - K Radhakrishnan - Full Document

North West Karnataka Road Transport ... vs Rafiq Moulasab Bagawan And Anr. on 14 January, 2003

In the case of Amati Hymavathi and Anr. v. Nissankararao Srikrishna Murthy and Ors., 2000 ACJ 350 (AP) a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh has considered number of decisions and observed that in the case of death of children on/after 14-11-1994, minimum compensation should be Rs. 50,000/-, but it may be more depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case.
Karnataka High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - S B Majage - Full Document

M. Nityananda Rao And Anr. vs Managing Director, Apsrtc on 27 July, 1999

11. Having considered the submissions of the learned Counsel for the appellants and the decision of both the Supreme Court and this Court, I am inclined to enhance the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The learned single Judge in Amati Hymavathi's case, 2nd supra, taking the ages of the deceased children and the nature of work and their educational and social status,, enhanced the compensation.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - E D Rao - Full Document

Mohammed Akbar And Anr. vs Mustafa Khan And Ors. on 19 September, 2003

8. The learned Counsel for the appellants has also referred to one more judgment pertaining to the group of appellants in the matter of Amti Hymavarthi Anr. v. Nissankararao Srikrishna Murthy and Ors. . In this reported judgment, the learned Counsel pointed out that the facts are similar. According to the learned Counsel, these petitions were governed by the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and his case is also governed by the said Act. In this reported case, an amount of Rs. 35,000/- is granted by way of compensation for the death of a boy who was 4 years old on the date of death. Another case from the same judgment which is being referred to is regarding grant of compensation to the tune of Rs. 25,000/- for the death of a boy who was 6 years old and in appeal which was enhanced to the tune of Rs. 35,000/-.
Bombay High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - S B Deshmukh - Full Document

Sh. Chakkanlal vs Sh.Anand Singh on 20 April, 2012

In Amati Hymavathi vs. Nissankararao Srikrishnamurthy, 1999 AJR 370 (AP) the Court emphasized that it is a duty of conductor and driver to see that either persons are prevented from boarding the bus or take care that the door is closed after all passengers have boarded in the bus. In the absence of such plea or defence or evidence, no plea of negligence or contributory negligence as against a child of tender age can be entertained or accepted.
Delhi District Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Smt. Savita And Ors. ... on 17 August, 2023

Appeal No. 4767/2009 Date of order 26.09.2011 o ekuuh; vkU/kzk mPp U;k;ky; ds U;kf;d n`"Vkar Amati Hymavathi And Anr. Vs Nissankararao Srikrishnamurthi 2000 ACJ 350 dh vksj /;ku vkdf"kZr djrs gq, ;g rdZ izLrqr fd;k fd bl ekeys esa ikap ekg dk cPpk gksus ij Hkh {kfriwfrZ jkf'k fnyok;k tkuk fof/klEer gSA 05- eSaus i{kdkjku ds fo}ku vf/koDrkx.k dh vksj ls izLrqr U;kf;d n`"Vkarksa dk xgu v/;;u fd;k vkSj bl izdj.k dh o v/khuLFk vf/kdj.k dh i=koyh dk /;kuiwoZd voyksdu fd;kA bl ekeys esa ;g Lohd`r fLFkfr gS fd nq?kZVuk fnukad 26-01-2014 dks ?kfVr gqbZ vkSj v/khuLFk vf/kdj.k }kjk tks cPps dh mez ikap ekg gksuk ekuh gS og lgh gSA 06- v/khuLFk vf/kdj.k }kjk tks {kfriwfrZ jkf"k dk fu/kkZj.k fd;k x;k gS mlesa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; ds fd'kuxksiky o vU; cuke ykyk o vU; 2013 ,e-,-lh-Mh- ¼,l-lh-½ ist 289 dk ekeyk o bl U;k;ky; ds eatwnsoh o vU; cuke "kadjflag o vU; 2014 ¼1½ ,e-,-lh-Mh- ¼jkt-½ ist 406 ds ekeys esa e`rd dh vk;q lkr o"kZ Fkh vkSj nksuksa gh ekeyksa esa 5]60]000@& #i;s {kfriwfrZ jkf"k fnyokbZ xbZ FkhA bu nksuksa ekeyksa ij fopkj djrs gq, gLrxr izdj.k esa e`rdk dh ekrk dh vk;q dks /;ku esa j[krs gq, 4]00]000@& #i;s {kfriwfrZ jkf"k fu/kkZfjr dh xbZA (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 04:23:46 AM) [2023:RJ-JD:25926] (4 of 6) [CMA-532/2017] {kfriwfrZ jkf"k 4]00]000@& #i;s dh x.kuk fdl izdkj ls dh xbZ ;g fu.kZ; esa Li"V ugha fd;k x;k gSA 07- iUnzg o"kZ rd dh vk;q ds cPps dh e`R;q ds ekeys esa fo}ku vf/koDrk chek dEiuh dh vksj ls izLrqr iwoZ esa of.kZr rhu ekuuh; U;k;kf/kifrx.k dh ihB ds js'kek dqekjh okys ekeys ds iSjk la[;k 43 (ii) esa fuEukuqlkj vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gS %& "43 (ii) In cases where the age of the deceased is upto 15 years, irrespective of the Section 166 or Section 163A under which the claim for compensation has been made, multiplier of 15 and the assessment as indicated in the Second Schedule subject to correction as pointed out in Column (6) of the table in Sarla Verma should be followed."
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Y K Purohit - Full Document

Savita And Anr vs Jeetu Bhai And Ors. (2023:Rj-Jd:25926) on 17 August, 2023

Appeal No. 4767/2009 Date of order 26.09.2011 o ekuuh; vkU/kzk mPp U;k;ky; ds U;kf;d n`"Vkar Amati Hymavathi And Anr. Vs Nissankararao Srikrishnamurthi 2000 ACJ 350 dh vksj /;ku vkdf"kZr djrs gq, ;g rdZ izLrqr fd;k fd bl ekeys esa ikap ekg dk cPpk gksus ij Hkh {kfriwfrZ jkf'k fnyok;k tkuk fof/klEer gSA 05- eSaus i{kdkjku ds fo}ku vf/koDrkx.k dh vksj ls izLrqr U;kf;d n`"Vkarksa dk xgu v/;;u fd;k vkSj bl izdj.k dh o v/khuLFk vf/kdj.k dh i=koyh dk /;kuiwoZd voyksdu fd;kA bl ekeys esa ;g Lohd`r fLFkfr gS fd nq?kZVuk fnukad 26-01-2014 dks ?kfVr gqbZ vkSj v/khuLFk vf/kdj.k }kjk tks cPps dh mez ikap ekg gksuk ekuh gS og lgh gSA 06- v/khuLFk vf/kdj.k }kjk tks {kfriwfrZ jkf"k dk fu/kkZj.k fd;k x;k gS mlesa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; ds fd'kuxksiky o vU; cuke ykyk o vU; 2013 ,e-,-lh-Mh- ¼,l-lh-½ ist 289 dk ekeyk o bl U;k;ky; ds eatwnsoh o vU; cuke "kadjflag o vU; 2014 ¼1½ ,e-,-lh-Mh- ¼jkt-½ ist 406 ds ekeys esa e`rd dh vk;q lkr o"kZ Fkh vkSj nksuksa gh ekeyksa esa 5]60]000@& #i;s {kfriwfrZ jkf"k fnyokbZ xbZ FkhA bu nksuksa ekeyksa ij fopkj djrs gq, gLrxr izdj.k esa e`rdk dh ekrk dh vk;q dks /;ku esa j[krs gq, 4]00]000@& #i;s {kfriwfrZ jkf"k fu/kkZfjr dh xbZA (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 04:23:47 AM) [2023:RJ-JD:25926] (4 of 6) [CMA-532/2017] {kfriwfrZ jkf"k 4]00]000@& #i;s dh x.kuk fdl izdkj ls dh xbZ ;g fu.kZ; esa Li"V ugha fd;k x;k gSA 07- iUnzg o"kZ rd dh vk;q ds cPps dh e`R;q ds ekeys esa fo}ku vf/koDrk chek dEiuh dh vksj ls izLrqr iwoZ esa of.kZr rhu ekuuh; U;k;kf/kifrx.k dh ihB ds js'kek dqekjh okys ekeys ds iSjk la[;k 43 (ii) esa fuEukuqlkj vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gS %& "43 (ii) In cases where the age of the deceased is upto 15 years, irrespective of the Section 166 or Section 163A under which the claim for compensation has been made, multiplier of 15 and the assessment as indicated in the Second Schedule subject to correction as pointed out in Column (6) of the table in Sarla Verma should be followed."
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Y K Purohit - Full Document
1