Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.50 seconds)
United India Insurance Company Ltd vs Sunita And Ors on 28 August, 2024 cites

National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Pranay Sethi on 31 October, 2017

Further, no amount has been awarded under the conventional heads and the amount awarded under the head 'loss of consortium' is also not as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Pranay Sethi (supra), JITENDER KUMAR 2024.08.29 10:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Chandigarh FAO-404-2015 -9- Magma General Insurance Company Limited (supra) and N. Jayasree (supra) and hence, the claimants would be entitled to Rs.18,000/- (Rs.15,000+20% increase) towards loss of estate and Rs.18,000/- (Rs.15,000+20% increase) towards funeral expenses and to an amount of Rs.48,000/- each (Rs.40,000+20% increase) towards loss of spousal, parental and filial consortium. Accordingly, the reworked compensation is as under :
Supreme Court of India Cites 32 - Cited by 9815 - D Misra - Full Document

Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd vs Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram on 18 September, 2018

Further, no amount has been awarded under the conventional heads and the amount awarded under the head 'loss of consortium' is also not as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Pranay Sethi (supra), JITENDER KUMAR 2024.08.29 10:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Chandigarh FAO-404-2015 -9- Magma General Insurance Company Limited (supra) and N. Jayasree (supra) and hence, the claimants would be entitled to Rs.18,000/- (Rs.15,000+20% increase) towards loss of estate and Rs.18,000/- (Rs.15,000+20% increase) towards funeral expenses and to an amount of Rs.48,000/- each (Rs.40,000+20% increase) towards loss of spousal, parental and filial consortium. Accordingly, the reworked compensation is as under :
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 4992 - I Malhotra - Full Document

Jeet Singh And Ors vs Sukhdev Singh And Ors on 14 May, 2019

12. Learned counsel for the claimants has not laid any challenge to the income of the deceased, multiplier and deduction applied by the JITENDER KUMAR 2024.08.29 10:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Chandigarh FAO-404-2015 -8- Tribunal. Learned counsel for the claimants has contended that the deceased in the present case was 27 years of age and no addition has been made towards loss of future prospects which ought to have been 40%. It is further the contention that no amount has been awarded under the conventional heads as well as the amount awarded under the head 'loss of consortium' is also not as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - D Mehta - Full Document
1