Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 23 (0.80 seconds)Arvind Kumar Mishra vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Anr on 29 September, 2010
In our view, the principles laid down in Arvind Kumar Mishra v. New Assurance Company Ltd., (supra) and Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar (supra) must be followed by all the Tribunals and the High Courts in determining the quantum of compensation payable to the victims of accident, who are disabled either permanently or temporarily. If the victim of the accident suffers permanent disability, then efforts should always be made to award adequate compensation not only for the physical injury and treatment, but also for the loss of earning and his inability to lead a normal life and enjoy amenities, which he would have enjoyed but for the disability caused due to the accident.
Mr. R.D. Hattangadi vs M/S Pest Control (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors on 6 January, 1995
In R.D. Hattangadi v. Pest Control (India) Private Limited and Ors.[1995 (1) SCC 551] , speaking about the heads of compensation, this Court has held thus:
Pratap Narain Singh Deo vs Srinivas Sabata And Anr on 4 December, 1975
In Mohan Soni v. Ram Avtar Tomar reported in 2012 (2) SCC 267, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that reduction of the earning capacity, with reference to Schedule I of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, in the case of amputation above knee to a Cart-Puller, due to the injuries sustained in a motor accident, is erroneous and referring to the decisions made in Pratap Narain Singh Deo v. Srinivas Sabata reported in 1976 (1) SCC 289 and K.Janardhan v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., reported in 2008 (8) SCC 518, assessed the loss of earning capacity as 100% and enhanced the compensation. While adverting to the arguments of scaling down the compensation, at Paragraph 13, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as follows:
K. Janardhan vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr on 9 May, 2008
In Mohan Soni v. Ram Avtar Tomar reported in 2012 (2) SCC 267, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that reduction of the earning capacity, with reference to Schedule I of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, in the case of amputation above knee to a Cart-Puller, due to the injuries sustained in a motor accident, is erroneous and referring to the decisions made in Pratap Narain Singh Deo v. Srinivas Sabata reported in 1976 (1) SCC 289 and K.Janardhan v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., reported in 2008 (8) SCC 518, assessed the loss of earning capacity as 100% and enhanced the compensation. While adverting to the arguments of scaling down the compensation, at Paragraph 13, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as follows:
Reshma Kumari & Ors vs Madan Mohan & Anr on 23 July, 2009
In Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan, (2009) 13 SCC 422, this Court reiterated that the compensation awarded under the Act should be just and also identified the factors which should be kept in mind while determining the amount of compensation. The relevant portions of the judgment are extracted below:
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd vs Jashuben & Ors on 14 February, 2008
In fact while determining the multiplicand this Court in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Jashuben held that even dearness allowance and perks with regard thereto from which the family would have derived monthly benefit, must be taken into consideration.
Raj Kumar vs Ajay Kumar & Anr on 18 October, 2010
In Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar (2011) 1 SCC 343, the Court considered some of the precedents and held:
Mohan Soni vs Ram Avtar Tomar & Ors on 10 January, 2012
In Mohan Soni v. Ram Avtar Tomar reported in 2012 (2) SCC 267, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that reduction of the earning capacity, with reference to Schedule I of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, in the case of amputation above knee to a Cart-Puller, due to the injuries sustained in a motor accident, is erroneous and referring to the decisions made in Pratap Narain Singh Deo v. Srinivas Sabata reported in 1976 (1) SCC 289 and K.Janardhan v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., reported in 2008 (8) SCC 518, assessed the loss of earning capacity as 100% and enhanced the compensation. While adverting to the arguments of scaling down the compensation, at Paragraph 13, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as follows:
Rekha Jain vs Natioanl Insurance Co.Ltd. & Ors on 1 August, 2013
13. It is also worthwhile to reproduce the decisions considered in Rekha Jain's case, for understanding the principles of law, to be followed by the Courts/Tribunals, in estimating the loss of earning capacity,
"In this regard, it is worthwhile to refer to certain paragraphs which have been referred to by the High Court in the case of K. Narasimha Murthy vs. The Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited and Anr. [ILR 2004 Karnataka 2471], wherein the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court has considered the relevant important aspects from the judgment of this Court and the House of Lords and different learned scholars and authors of books on awarding pecuniary and non pecuniary damages. The abovementioned decision states about the approach of the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunals and Courts for awarding just and reasonable compensation in favour of the claimants in relation to the bodily injuries suffered by them.