Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.18 seconds)The Factories Act, 1948
Section 173 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Arun Kumar Agrawal & Anr vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors on 22 July, 2010
In the case of Arun Kumar
Agrawal Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd., reported in
(2010) 9 SCC 218, the Hon'ble Supreme Court highlighted
that the contribution made by a wife to the household is
invaluable and cannot be computed solely in terms of money.
The Court considered the gratuitous services rendered by wife
and at the same time managing the household affairs, which
cannot be equated with services rendered by others. Hence,
fixed the notional income of wife as Rs.3,000/-.
Kirti vs Oriental Insurance Company Limited on 5 January, 2021
The aforesaid
principles have been reiterated by the Supreme Court in its
subsequent decision in case of Kirti & Anr. Vs. Oriental
Insurance Company Ltd., reported in (2021) 2 SCC 166,
thereby holding that while calculating notional income
Page 8 of 15
Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Sat May 02 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:16 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/405/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
involving the homemaker, the Courts are required to bear in
mind their invaluable role towards the family to arrive at fair
and just compensation. The Courts therefore negated the
general notion prevailing that homemakers do not contribute
an economic value to the society and does not share the same
pedestal to that of bread earner. Applying the aforesaid
principles in the facts of the case even considering the fact
that the claimant was a retired teacher and pensioner at the
time of the accident, in absence of any source of income being
established, though pleaded, the Tribunal ought to have
considered the fact that apart from being a retired teacher,
she still continued to be a homemaker and considering her
contribution to her family, the notional income of the claimant
was required to be appreciated accordingly.
Benson George vs Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. on 25 February, 2022
13. The enhancement of compensation prayed for under the
head of pain, shock and suffering is concerned, it would be
appropriate to revisit the observations made by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Sri Benson Vs. Reliance General
Insurance Co. Ltd., reported in (2022) 13 SCC 142. The facts
of the case suggests that the victim of the accident was aged
29 years and having suffered grievous brain injuries, despite
multiple operations being performed and prolonged period of
hospitalization, he had still continued in coma. The Court
observed that the pain suffering and trauma suffered by the
injured cannot be compensated in terms of money.
Considering the fact that the claimant was in coma for
substantial period of long years and permanently bedridden
during his entire life, had awarded amount of compensation
under the head of pain, shock and suffering of Rs.2,00,000/-.
Considering the aforesaid principles in the fact of the case,
Page 11 of 15
Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Sat May 02 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:16 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/405/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
the claimant has suffered motor accident at the age of 63
years and has been bedridden for almost 16 years having
fortunately survived, however, with such medical condition,
she still continues to bear the mental and physical agony of
being completely paralysed and confined to bed. The claimant
is therefore held entitled to enhanced amount of
compensation under the head of pain, shock and suffering of
Rs.1,00,000/-. As regards the medical bills being proved by
the claimant worth Rs.4,03,598/-, the same being not
controverted, is hereby confirmed.
Section 166 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
1