Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.21 seconds)Sarla Verma & Ors vs Delhi Transport Corp.& Anr on 15 April, 2009
Thus, she
was aged about 50 years on the date of accident (14.01.2010) for
which the appropriate multiplier applicable for the age group of
4650 is 13, as mentioned in case titled "Sarla Verma's Case
(Supra), and the total loss of dependency comes out to (Rs.
10,500/ X 12 X 13)= Rs. 16,38,000/. I also award Rs. 10,000/
towards funeral expenses, Rs. 25,000/ towards loss of love and
affection and Rs. 10,000/ towards loss of estate. In total, I
hereby award a sum of Rs. 16,83,000/ (Rupees Sixteen Lac and
Eighty Three Thousand Only) in favour of the petitioners and
against the respondents.
General Manager, Kerala S.R.T.C vs Susamma Thomas on 6 January, 1993
10. Acting on the guidelines issued by Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India in case titled "G.M Kerala State Road Transport
Corporation v/s S.Susamma Thomas" (1994) 2 SCC 176 and
in order to avoid the money being frittered away, 50% share of
the petitioners shall be kept in a FDR in a nationalized bank
hereinafter named for a period of 05 years. No loan or advance
shall be allowed against the said FDRs but the petitioners are at
liberty to withdraw the interest quarterly on the FDRs.
Smt. Kaushnuma Begum And Ors vs The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. And Ors on 3 January, 2001
A roving inquiry is not required to prove the rashness
and negligence on the part of the driver as was held in case titled
'Kaushnumma Begum and others v/s New India Assurance
Company Limited' (2001 ACJ 421 SC) & the issue of wrongful
act or omission on the part of driver of the motor vehicle involved
in the accident has been left to a secondary importance and mere
use or involvement of motor vehicle in causing bodily injuries or
Suit No. 201/10 Page 6 of 13
death to a human being or damage to property would make the
petition maintainable. It is also settled law that the term rashness
and negligence has to be construed lightly while making a
decision on a petition for claim for the same as compared to the
word rashness and negligence as finds mention in the Indian
Penal Code. This is because the chapter in the Motor Vehicle
Act dealing with compensation is a benevolent legislation and
not a penal one. The present petition is on a better footing for the
reason that there is an eye witnesses to the accident whose
testimony is on record and even the copy of Accident Information
Report and the copy of Final Report filed on record also clearly
reveals involvement of the offending vehicle and causing of fatal
injuries to the deceased due to rash and negligent driving of
respondent no. 1.
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Amod Kumar Ray & Ors. vs Raj Kumar Chauhan And Ors. on 25 May, 2011
In terms of the directions passed by the Hon'ble High
Court of Delhi in its latest judgment titled as "Amod Kumar Ray
& Ors Vs Raj Kumar Chauhan & Ors" {CM(M) 649/2011
decided on 25.05.2011}, the Insurance company is directed to
deposit the award amount in the State Bank of India, District
Courts Saket, New Delhi in the name of the petitioners in terms of
the award and shall file the compliance report. It is made clear
that at the time of the deposit of the award amount with the bank,
the Insurance company shall specifically mention the suit no. of
the case, title of the case as well as date of decision with the
name of court on the back side of the cheque. The insurance
company shall also file a copy of the award attested by its own
Suit No. 201/10 Page 12 of 13
officer to the bank at the time of deposit of the amount with the
bank.
1