Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.21 seconds)

Sarla Verma & Ors vs Delhi Transport Corp.& Anr on 15 April, 2009

22. Jitender Kumar was 25 years old at the time of his death. As it has been already observed, loss of dependency in this case needs to be calculated on the basis of minimum wages of `3964/- per month. The claimants in this case are parents of the deceased. The tribunal apparently committed an error by mentioning the age of father as 55 MACA Nos. 510/2012, 734/2012, 741/2012 & 827/2012 Page 10 of 14 years and age of mother as 53 years and on that basis adopted multiplier of 11. Copies of voter ID cards on record instead show the age of the father and the mother, at the relevant time, as 51 and 45 years respectively. Taking the average of 48 years, the multiplier of 13 should have been adopted in order to compute the loss of dependency [Sarla Verma (supra)]. The deceased was a bachelor and, thus, fifty percent (50%) of the income is to be deducted towards his personal and living expenses. The monthly loss of dependency, therefore, comes to `1,982/-. The total loss of dependency comes to (1,982x12x13) `3,09,192/-. Adding the non-pecuniary damages in the composite sum of `1,50,000/- on the same lines as mentioned in the case of Pramod Pal above, the total compensation comes to `4,59,192/- or rounded off to `4,60,000/-.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 20141 - R V Raveendran - Full Document

Reshma Kumari & Ors vs Madan Mohan & Anr on 2 April, 2013

13. The claimants in the two aforementioned cases arising out of the deaths of Jitender Kumar & Satish Kumar did not lead any formal evidence with regard to the engagement of the said persons in avocations stated in the petitions. It is noted that though it was claimed that the said persons were working for gain by running their respective shops/establishments, even the addresses of the said shops were not declared. Mere production of bill books cannot be believed. In these circumstances, this court agrees with the submission of the insurance company that the income could not have been assessed merely on the verbal claim of the respective claimants. The rule in Reshma Kumari (supra) applies to the matters arising out of deaths of Satish Kumar and Jitender Kumar because the claimants here pleaded that the said deceased persons were self employed and have not led any evidence showing their income to be reflecting periodic increase.
Supreme Court of India Cites 26 - Cited by 2700 - R M Lodha - Full Document

National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Pushpa Devi Aggrawal And Ors. on 30 March, 2012

Though this view was affirmed by a bench of three Hon'ble Judges in Reshma Kumari & Ors. Vs. Madan Mohan & Anr., (2013) 9 SCC 65, on account of divergence of views, as arising from the ruling in Rajesh & Ors. vs. Rajbir & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54, the issue was later referred to a larger bench, inter-alia, by order dated 02.07.2014 in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pushpa & Ors., (2015) 9 SCC166.
Delhi High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 209 - J R Midha - Full Document

Sunil Kumar vs Pyar Mohd & Ors on 22 January, 2016

12. Against the above backdrop, by judgment dated 22.01.2016 passed in MAC Appeal No. 956/2012 (Sunil Kumar v. Pyar Mohd.), this Court has found it proper to follow the view taken earlier by a learned single judge in MAC Appeal No. 189/2014 (HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Lalta Devi & Ors.) decided on 12.1.2015, presently taking the decision in Reshma Kumari (Supra) as the binding precedent, till such time the law on the subject of future prospects for those who are "self-employed" or engaged in gainful employment at a "fixed salary" is clarified by a larger bench of the Supreme Court.
Delhi High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 239 - R K Gauba - Full Document

Lalta Devi & Anr. vs Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Co Ltd & Ors. on 12 January, 2015

12. Against the above backdrop, by judgment dated 22.01.2016 passed in MAC Appeal No. 956/2012 (Sunil Kumar v. Pyar Mohd.), this Court has found it proper to follow the view taken earlier by a learned single judge in MAC Appeal No. 189/2014 (HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Lalta Devi & Ors.) decided on 12.1.2015, presently taking the decision in Reshma Kumari (Supra) as the binding precedent, till such time the law on the subject of future prospects for those who are "self-employed" or engaged in gainful employment at a "fixed salary" is clarified by a larger bench of the Supreme Court.

Smt. Kaushnuma Begum And Ors vs The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. And Ors on 3 January, 2001

21. Having regard to the consistent view taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in series of cases that 9% would be an appropriate rate of interest, it is directed that the award shall carry interest @ nine percent (9%) per annum from the date of filing of petition till realization [Kaushnuma Begum vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (2001) 2 SCC 9; Supe Dei vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. (2009) 4 SCC 513; Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi vs Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy and Ors. (2011) 14 SCC 481; Basappa vs T. Ramesh (2014) 10 SCC 789; Syed Sadiq etc. vs Divisional Manager, United India Ins.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 2652 - Full Document

Smt. Supe Dei And Ors. vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. And Anr. on 16 April, 2002

21. Having regard to the consistent view taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in series of cases that 9% would be an appropriate rate of interest, it is directed that the award shall carry interest @ nine percent (9%) per annum from the date of filing of petition till realization [Kaushnuma Begum vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (2001) 2 SCC 9; Supe Dei vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. (2009) 4 SCC 513; Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi vs Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy and Ors. (2011) 14 SCC 481; Basappa vs T. Ramesh (2014) 10 SCC 789; Syed Sadiq etc. vs Divisional Manager, United India Ins.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 261 - Full Document

M.C.D vs Asscn.,Victims Of Uphaar Tragedy & Ors on 13 October, 2011

21. Having regard to the consistent view taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in series of cases that 9% would be an appropriate rate of interest, it is directed that the award shall carry interest @ nine percent (9%) per annum from the date of filing of petition till realization [Kaushnuma Begum vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (2001) 2 SCC 9; Supe Dei vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. (2009) 4 SCC 513; Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi vs Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy and Ors. (2011) 14 SCC 481; Basappa vs T. Ramesh (2014) 10 SCC 789; Syed Sadiq etc. vs Divisional Manager, United India Ins.
Supreme Court of India Cites 27 - Cited by 1848 - R V Raveendran - Full Document

Basappa S/O Sanganabasappa Bahvikatti vs T Ramesh S/O Tangavelu & Anr on 10 October, 2014

21. Having regard to the consistent view taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in series of cases that 9% would be an appropriate rate of interest, it is directed that the award shall carry interest @ nine percent (9%) per annum from the date of filing of petition till realization [Kaushnuma Begum vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (2001) 2 SCC 9; Supe Dei vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. (2009) 4 SCC 513; Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi vs Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy and Ors. (2011) 14 SCC 481; Basappa vs T. Ramesh (2014) 10 SCC 789; Syed Sadiq etc. vs Divisional Manager, United India Ins.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 30 - Full Document
1   2 Next