Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.21 seconds)The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Section 338 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Mr. R.D. Hattangadi vs M/S Pest Control (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors on 6 January, 1995
22. At this stage, before proceeding further, by rely upon the judgments of
C.K. Subramania Iyer v. T. Kunhikuttan Nair, R.D. Hattangadi v. Pest Control
(India) (P) Ltd. and Baker v. Willoughby which are referred and relied in Raj
Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar & Anr. (2011) 1 Supreme Court cases 343 decided
by Hon'ble SC, it can be noted that the provision of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988 ("the Act", for short) makes it clear that the award must be just, which
means that compensation should, to the extent possible, fully and adequately
MACT No.39/18 Om Prakash Gupta v. Pooja Goel Page No. 6 of 16 BK
:7:
restore the claimant to the position prior to the accident. The object of awarding
damages is to make good the loss suffered as a result of wrong done as far as
money can do so, in a fair, reasonable and equitable manner. The court or the
Tribunal shall have to assess the damages objectively and exclude from
consideration any speculation or fancy, though some conjecture with reference
to the nature of disability and its consequences, is inevitable. A person is not
only to be compensated for the physical injury, but also for the loss which he
suffered as a result of such injury. This means that he is to be compensated for
his inability to lead a full life, his inability to enjoy those normal amenities
which he would have enjoyed but for the injuries, and his inability to earn as
much as he used to earn or could have earned.
Raj Kumar vs Ajay Kumar & Anr on 18 October, 2010
23.6. It was observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in such case of Raj Kumar
(supra) that what usually poses some difficulty is the assessment of the loss of
future earnings on account of permanent disability--Item (ii) (a).
A.V.Padma & Ors vs R.Venugopal & Ors on 27 January, 2012
30. At this stage, it is relevant to the refer to the judgment of A. V. Padma &
Ors. Vs., R. Venugopal & Ors. (2012) 3 Supreme Court Cases 378:
Section 177 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 304A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
National Insurance Company Ltd. vs Smt. Pushpa Rana And Ors. on 20 December, 2007
In National Insurance Co. Vs. Pushpa Rana 2009 ACJ
287 Delhi, it was laid down that completion of investigation and filing of
chargesheet u/s 279/304A IPC are sufficient proof of negligence of the driver of
the offending vehicle.