Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.18 seconds)
Jagdev Singh And Ors vs Parveen Kumar And Ors on 7 February, 2017 cites

United India Insurance Co.Ltd vs Sube Singh And Others on 15 January, 2014

Counsel for the appellant has urged that the Tribunal had wrongly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.9,000/- as she was a housewife also and some addition towards the services rendered to the family and at least Rs.5000/- should have been added to calculate the income. It was urged that the deduction of 10% was wrongly made as there was no plea or evidence that the deceased had contributed in the accident and at the most it can be said that she was negligent in not wearing the helmet and this cannot be taken as a component for reduction of the compensation. It was urged that there should have been addition of 50% towards future prospects and the Tribunal should have awarded one lac under the head of loss of consortium and Rs.1 lac for loss of her estate and Rs.1 lac for love and affection for the minor child. Reliance was placed upon United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sube Singh and others(FAO No.218 of 2014, decided on 15.01.2014), Jitendera Khimshankar Trivedi and others v. Kasam Daud Kumbhar and others, 2015(1) Law Herald 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 10-07-2017 03:38:45 ::: FAO No.10431 of 2014 -3- (SC) 657, Paramjit Singh and another v. Dilbagh Singh alias Bagga and others, 2014 (4) AICJ 65, Vimal Kumar and others v. Kishore Dan and others, 2013 (2)RCR(Civil), 945, Rupinder Sharma alias Komal Sharma and others v. SPR Basant Kumar and another, 2013 (4) TAC 546 and India Lease Development Ltd. v. Savita and others, 2013 (2) AICJ 563.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 56 - Full Document

Jitendra Khimshankar Trivedi & Ors vs Kasam Daud Kumbhar & Ors on 3 February, 2015

Counsel for the appellant has urged that the Tribunal had wrongly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.9,000/- as she was a housewife also and some addition towards the services rendered to the family and at least Rs.5000/- should have been added to calculate the income. It was urged that the deduction of 10% was wrongly made as there was no plea or evidence that the deceased had contributed in the accident and at the most it can be said that she was negligent in not wearing the helmet and this cannot be taken as a component for reduction of the compensation. It was urged that there should have been addition of 50% towards future prospects and the Tribunal should have awarded one lac under the head of loss of consortium and Rs.1 lac for loss of her estate and Rs.1 lac for love and affection for the minor child. Reliance was placed upon United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sube Singh and others(FAO No.218 of 2014, decided on 15.01.2014), Jitendera Khimshankar Trivedi and others v. Kasam Daud Kumbhar and others, 2015(1) Law Herald 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 10-07-2017 03:38:45 ::: FAO No.10431 of 2014 -3- (SC) 657, Paramjit Singh and another v. Dilbagh Singh alias Bagga and others, 2014 (4) AICJ 65, Vimal Kumar and others v. Kishore Dan and others, 2013 (2)RCR(Civil), 945, Rupinder Sharma alias Komal Sharma and others v. SPR Basant Kumar and another, 2013 (4) TAC 546 and India Lease Development Ltd. v. Savita and others, 2013 (2) AICJ 563.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 202 - R Banumathi - Full Document

Vimal Kanwar & Ors vs Kishore Dan & Ors on 3 May, 2013

Counsel for the appellant has urged that the Tribunal had wrongly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.9,000/- as she was a housewife also and some addition towards the services rendered to the family and at least Rs.5000/- should have been added to calculate the income. It was urged that the deduction of 10% was wrongly made as there was no plea or evidence that the deceased had contributed in the accident and at the most it can be said that she was negligent in not wearing the helmet and this cannot be taken as a component for reduction of the compensation. It was urged that there should have been addition of 50% towards future prospects and the Tribunal should have awarded one lac under the head of loss of consortium and Rs.1 lac for loss of her estate and Rs.1 lac for love and affection for the minor child. Reliance was placed upon United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sube Singh and others(FAO No.218 of 2014, decided on 15.01.2014), Jitendera Khimshankar Trivedi and others v. Kasam Daud Kumbhar and others, 2015(1) Law Herald 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 10-07-2017 03:38:45 ::: FAO No.10431 of 2014 -3- (SC) 657, Paramjit Singh and another v. Dilbagh Singh alias Bagga and others, 2014 (4) AICJ 65, Vimal Kumar and others v. Kishore Dan and others, 2013 (2)RCR(Civil), 945, Rupinder Sharma alias Komal Sharma and others v. SPR Basant Kumar and another, 2013 (4) TAC 546 and India Lease Development Ltd. v. Savita and others, 2013 (2) AICJ 563.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 886 - Full Document

India Lease Development Ltd. vs Savita & Ors. on 5 March, 2012

Counsel for the appellant has urged that the Tribunal had wrongly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.9,000/- as she was a housewife also and some addition towards the services rendered to the family and at least Rs.5000/- should have been added to calculate the income. It was urged that the deduction of 10% was wrongly made as there was no plea or evidence that the deceased had contributed in the accident and at the most it can be said that she was negligent in not wearing the helmet and this cannot be taken as a component for reduction of the compensation. It was urged that there should have been addition of 50% towards future prospects and the Tribunal should have awarded one lac under the head of loss of consortium and Rs.1 lac for loss of her estate and Rs.1 lac for love and affection for the minor child. Reliance was placed upon United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sube Singh and others(FAO No.218 of 2014, decided on 15.01.2014), Jitendera Khimshankar Trivedi and others v. Kasam Daud Kumbhar and others, 2015(1) Law Herald 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 10-07-2017 03:38:45 ::: FAO No.10431 of 2014 -3- (SC) 657, Paramjit Singh and another v. Dilbagh Singh alias Bagga and others, 2014 (4) AICJ 65, Vimal Kumar and others v. Kishore Dan and others, 2013 (2)RCR(Civil), 945, Rupinder Sharma alias Komal Sharma and others v. SPR Basant Kumar and another, 2013 (4) TAC 546 and India Lease Development Ltd. v. Savita and others, 2013 (2) AICJ 563.
Delhi High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 8 - G P Mittal - Full Document

Rupinder Sharma @ Komal Sharma And ... vs Spr. Basant Kumar And Another on 11 April, 2013

Counsel for the appellant has urged that the Tribunal had wrongly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.9,000/- as she was a housewife also and some addition towards the services rendered to the family and at least Rs.5000/- should have been added to calculate the income. It was urged that the deduction of 10% was wrongly made as there was no plea or evidence that the deceased had contributed in the accident and at the most it can be said that she was negligent in not wearing the helmet and this cannot be taken as a component for reduction of the compensation. It was urged that there should have been addition of 50% towards future prospects and the Tribunal should have awarded one lac under the head of loss of consortium and Rs.1 lac for loss of her estate and Rs.1 lac for love and affection for the minor child. Reliance was placed upon United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sube Singh and others(FAO No.218 of 2014, decided on 15.01.2014), Jitendera Khimshankar Trivedi and others v. Kasam Daud Kumbhar and others, 2015(1) Law Herald 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 10-07-2017 03:38:45 ::: FAO No.10431 of 2014 -3- (SC) 657, Paramjit Singh and another v. Dilbagh Singh alias Bagga and others, 2014 (4) AICJ 65, Vimal Kumar and others v. Kishore Dan and others, 2013 (2)RCR(Civil), 945, Rupinder Sharma alias Komal Sharma and others v. SPR Basant Kumar and another, 2013 (4) TAC 546 and India Lease Development Ltd. v. Savita and others, 2013 (2) AICJ 563.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 2 - K Kannan - Full Document
1