Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.35 seconds)
Shrikant Nana Kapde vs Yuvraj Narayan Sonawane And Ors on 16 October, 2018 cites

Arvind Kumar Mishra vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Anr on 29 September, 2010

In "Jagdish vs Mohan and Ors" [AIR 2018 Supreme Court 1347], three judges bench of the Apex Court directed that the principle laid down in "Arvind Kumar Mishra" (supra) and "Raj Kumar" (supra) must be followed by the Tribunals and High Courts in determining the quantum of compensation payable to the victims of the accident who are disabled either permanently or temporarily.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 1045 - R M Lodha - Full Document

Raj Kumar vs Ajay Kumar & Anr on 18 October, 2010

In "Jagdish vs Mohan and Ors" [AIR 2018 Supreme Court 1347], three judges bench of the Apex Court directed that the principle laid down in "Arvind Kumar Mishra" (supra) and "Raj Kumar" (supra) must be followed by the Tribunals and High Courts in determining the quantum of compensation payable to the victims of the accident who are disabled either permanently or temporarily.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 3811 - R V Raveendran - Full Document

Jagdish Chander (Dead) By L. Rs vs Brij Mohan & Ors on 6 February, 1978

In "Jagdish vs Mohan and Ors" [AIR 2018 Supreme Court 1347], three judges bench of the Apex Court directed that the principle laid down in "Arvind Kumar Mishra" (supra) and "Raj Kumar" (supra) must be followed by the Tribunals and High Courts in determining the quantum of compensation payable to the victims of the accident who are disabled either permanently or temporarily.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 182 - S M Ali - Full Document

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

15. In absence of any documentary evidence regarding monthly income of the claimant and considering nature of his source of earning, his notional income is assessed at the rate of Rs. 6,000/- per month. The injury certificate issued by Dr. Saindane (PW 3) and the Governmental Hospital papers (Exh. 47) show that at the relevant time of the accident the age of the claimant was 18 years. Therefore, in view of guidelines issued by the Larger Bench of the Apex Court in "National Insurance Company Ltd. vs Pranay Sethi and others" [2018 (3) Mh.L.J. 70], 40% of income has to be added in the monthly income of the claimant which is assessed as Rs. 2,400/-, thus, the monthly income of the claimant is assessed as Rs. 6,000 + 2400 = 8,400/-.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 10133 - K Kannan - Full Document

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

16. Considering the age of the claimant as '18' years at the time of accident, the multiplier of "18" will be applicable in view of the settled principle of law in "Smt. Sarla Varma and Ors Vs Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr" [AIR 2009 Supreme Court 3104]. The annual loss of the claimant is assessed as Rs. 25,200/- and after applying multiplier of "18" the loss of future earnings of the claimant is assessed as Rs. 4,53,600/-. Therefore, under the head of loss of future income the claimant is entitled compensation of Rs. 4,53,600/-.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 20141 - R V Raveendran - Full Document
1