cites: 193048079

M/S Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance ... vs Mandala Yadagari Goud on 27 March, 2015

In view of the judgment delivered today in Civil Appeal No.6600/2015 titled as M/s. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Mandala Yadagari Gold & Ors., the multiplier in the present case will be 16, and not as per the impugned order, based on the age of the deceased. The amount now payable in view thereof would be as under :

Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 1 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Munna Lal Jain & Anr vs Vipin Kumar Sharma & Ors on 15 May, 2015

This judgment undoubtedly relied upon the case of Munna Lal Jain (supra) which is also a three Judge Bench judgment in this behalf.

Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 1196 - Full Document

Sarla Verma & Ors vs Delhi Transport Corp.& Anr on 15 April, 2009

(ii) the deductions to be made towards the personal living expenses of the deceased; and (iii) the multiplier to be applied with reference to the age of the deceased. It is the third aspect which is of significance and Reshma Kumari categorically states that it does not want to revisit the law settled in Sarla Verma case in this behalf.

Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 20141 - R V Raveendran - Full Document

National Insurance Company Ltd vs Pranay Sethi Son Of Late Prashant Sethi ... on 20 April, 2011

12. Not only this, the subsequent judgment of the Constitution bench in Pranay Sethi (supra) has also been referred to in Sube Singh for the purpose of calculation of the multiplier.

Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 10133 - K Kannan - Full Document

New India Assurance Company Ltd vs Smt. Shanti Pathak And Ors on 10 July, 2007

He also made a reference to one order of a three Judge Bench in New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Shanti Pathak (Smt.) & Ors.5, but that one is indisputably an adjudication on given facts.

Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 504 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Manjuri Bera vs Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. And Anr on 30 March, 2007

9. The focus for determination of such claim is the deceased and what would be his contribution towards the 6 See Manjuri Bera (Smt) v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. And Anr., (2007) 10 SCC 643 5 dependents would he to be alive, for the benefits of the dependents. It is trite to say, and in fact conceded by the learned counsel for the insurance company, that in case the deceased is a married person, it is the age of the deceased which is to be taken into account. The question is whether in case the deceased is a bachelor, a different principle for calculation of the multiplier should be applied by shifting the focus to the age of the claimants? We are of the view that the answer to this question should be in the negative.

Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 369 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Reshma Kumari & Ors vs Madan Mohan & Anr on 2 April, 2013

The relevant portion of the judgment has also been extracted. Once again the extracted portion in turn refers to the judgment of a three Judge Bench in Reshma Kumari & Ors. Vs. Madan Mohan & Anr.7.

Supreme Court of India Cites 26 - Cited by 2700 - R M Lodha - Full Document

The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

Union of India - Act Cites 0 - Cited by 94259

Search Results Page

Refine Search

Search Results