Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.39 seconds)The Minimum Wages Act, 1948
Section 133 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs Sangeeta Devi & Ors on 22 February, 2016
In view of my findings on issues no. 1 and 2, I award
compensation of Rs. 17,66,000/ alongwith interest @ 9% per annum in favour
of petitioner and against the respondents w.e.f. date of filing of the petition i.e.
17.02.2014 till the date of its realization (Reliance placed on judgment
"Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sangeeta Devi & Ors bearing MAC.
APP. 165/2011 decided on 22.02.2016).
Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co.Ltd vs Heeraman And Ors. 56 Mac/460/2012 ... on 13 February, 2018
32. As already mentioned above, there is sufficient evidence on
record to establish that the petitioner had suffered fracture acetabulum B/L,
fracture fibula left, multiple puncture wounds over right upper eyelid , multiple
lacerated wound over right forearm, multiple abrasions over right flank and
right elbow and abrasions and blunt injuries all over his body due to the
accident in question. He has also sustained permanent disability of 41% in
relation to his both lower limbs, which is duly established from the testimony of
PW4 Dr. Jitender Singh and Disability Certificate (Ex. PW3/5) issued by BSA
Hospital, Rohini, Delhi. It is mentioned in the Disability Certificate that the
case of petitioner is that of stiffness and pain in right hip. Thus, he would not
be able to enjoy general amenities of life after the accident in question, during
rest of his life and his quality of life has been definitely affected. In view of the
nature of injuries including permanent disability suffered by him and his
continued treatment for considerable period, I award a notional sum of Rs.
1,50,000/ towards loss of amenities of life to the petitioner. (Reliance placed
on "IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Arjun & Ors.",
MAC APP. No. 01/2013, decided on 04.01.20158 by Hon'ble Delhi High
Court).
Section 166 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 168 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Vinod Kumar @ Bittoo vs Roshni & Ors. on 5 July, 2012
30. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the matter titled as " Vinod Kumar Bitoo
Vs. Roshni & Ors." passed in appeal bearing no. MAC.APP 518/2010
decided on 05.07.12, has held as under:
" It is difficult to measure the pain and suffering in terms of
money which is suffered by a victim on account of serious
injuries caused to him in a motor vehicle accident. Since
the compensation is required to be paid for pain and
suffering an attempt must be made to award
compensation which may have some objective relation
with the pain and suffering underwent by the victim. For
this purpose, the Claims Tribunal and the Courts normally
consider the nature of injury; the part of the body where
the injuries were sustained, surgeries, if any, underwent
by the victim, confinement in the hospital and the duration
of treatment".
National Insurance Company Ltd vs Pranay Sethi Son Of Late Prashant Sethi ... on 20 April, 2011
As per copy of his
10th class marksheet( Ex. PW3/2), his date of 16.06.1980. The date of accident
is 13.10.2013. In view of said document, his age would come somewhere
between 3334 years as on the date of accident. Hence, the appropriate
multiplier would be 16 in view of recent pronouncement made by constitutional
bench of Apex Court in the case titled as "National Insurance Company Ltd.
Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors.", passed in SLP(Civil) No. 25590/14 decided on
31.10.17. The notional monthly income of petitioner has been taken as
Rs.9,802/ per month as discussed above. Thus, the loss of monthly future
income would be Rs. 3,920.80 paise (Rs. 9,802/ x 40/100 ). The total loss of
future income would be Rs. 10,53,911.04 paise (Rs. 3,920.80 paise x 140/100
x 12 x 16). Thus, a sum of Rs. 10,54,000/ (rounded off) is awarded in favour
of petitioner under this head.