Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.74 seconds)
Documents citing Smt Suman Malhotra & Anr vs Gulfam & Ors on 4 July, 2013

Suman Malhotra W/O Late Sh. Anuj Kumar ... vs Gulfam S/O Kabul Aziz on 21 September, 2013

25. Rs. 1 lac with proportionate interest be given to petitioner No.2 (son of deceased) and be kept in FDR in his name for five years. Remaining amount with proportionate interest be given to widow of deceased (petitioner No.1), out of which Rs. 1 lac be released to her and remaining amount with proportionate MACT No.338/13 Suman Malhotra v. Gulfam 16 of 17 17 interest be kept in FDR in her name for three years.
Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Rambir Yadav vs . Harish Yadav & Anr. on 17 September, 2020

However, since Section 163A and the Second Schedule attached therewith were introduced by the Legislature as special provisions for grant of compensation on structured formula basis, it contains a cap on income of a victim and the maximum income which could be taken as per the said Schedule has been prescribed as Rs. 40,000/- per annum. As already discussed, in view of judgments of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in cases Rukmani Devi (supra) and Smt. Suman Malhotra & Anr. (supra), this claim petition under Section 163A can still be maintained with the annual income of deceased capped at Rs. 40,000/- per annum, even if the victim had an income of more than that.
Delhi District Court Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shri Maan Singh vs Shri Anil Jain on 1 March, 2014

In the case of Suman Malhotra & Anr. v. Gulfam & Ors., 2013 (6) AD (Delhi) 60 the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has again said in para 7 that in Rukmani Devi (supra), the aforesaid case was considered and finally answered that the Tribunal has to consider the claim petition whether the income of the deceased was more than Rs. 40,000/- p.a.; but it is no where said that if in any petition the income of the deceased was claimed more than Rs. 40,000/-, then a victim of the accident cannot file the claim petition under Section 163 A of the Act.
Delhi District Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Om Parkash Sharma And Ors vs Prashant And Ors on 18 February, 2026

5. Though, the petitioners have claimed in their written submissions that income of deceased was Rs.11,830/- but he has not filed any documentary proof. Even further the deceased was RAKESH minor. Moreover, the petition has been converted to be under KUMAR SINGH Section 163A of M.V. Act. Though, earlier the said provision was Digitally signed by RAKESH KUMAR SINGH contemplating compensation as per schedule but in the year Date: 2026.02.18 16:35:02 +0530 2018, a notification was issued by the Government fixing Rs.5 Lakhs compensation for death. The accident in the instant case occurred in the year 2017 i.e. prior to the amendment notification but the retrospective application has been accepted by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Suman Malhotra Vs. Gulfam, 2025 DHC 10366. Therefore, it has to be accepted the claimants in the present case shall be entitled to receive a fixed sum of Rs.5 Lakhs as compensation.
Delhi District Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1