Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.22 seconds)

General Manager, Kerala S.R.T.C vs Susamma Thomas on 6 January, 1993

In this MAC. APP. No.875/2011&233/2012 Page 10 of 16 connection learned Counsel for the Insurance Company has also drawn our attention to the decision in the case of Kerala SRTC v. Susamma Thomas, (1994) 2 SCC 176, particularly on paragraph 8 of the report, where it is observed that the principle in the case of Davies v. Powell was adopted, in the case of Gobald Motors (supra). It is thus submitted that principle of balancing of loss and gains, so as to arrive at a just and fair amount of compensation has been accepted by this Court as well.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 4294 - G N Ray - Full Document

Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. ... vs Master Manmeet Singh & Ors. on 30 January, 2012

In the circumstances, and on the principle laid down in Royal Sundaram (supra) the Appellants in cross appeal were entitled to compensation on the salary of a matriculate. The Appellants in the cross appeal were not entitled to any addition as the deceased was aged more than 50 years. The salary of a matriculate on the date of the accident was ` 7410/- per month. Adopting the multiplier of '11' according to the deceased's age the loss of dependency would come to ` 9,78,120/- (7410x12x11). In addition, the Claimants were rightly awarded a sum of ` 1,52,000/- on account of the treatment, which was not reimbursed by the Insurance Company on account of Medi- claim policy. On adding notional sum of ` 25,000/- for the loss of Love and Affection, ` 10,000/- each towards Loss of Consortium, Loss of Estate and Funeral Expenses, the overall compensation would come to ` 11,85,120/-.

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Etc. Etc vs Patrica Jean Mahajan And Ors. Etc. Etc on 8 July, 2002

In United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Patricia Jean Mahajan (2002) 6 SCC 281, it was held that the deductions are admissible from the amount of compensation in case the MAC. APP. No.875/2011&233/2012 Page 8 of 16 claimant receive some benefit as a consequence of injuries suffered which the Claimant otherwise would not have been entitled to. The Supreme Court held as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 446 - B Kumar - Full Document
1