Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.26 seconds)Section 171 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
National Insurance Company Ltd. vs Birender on 13 January, 2020
23.This Court already held that all the Appellants are the dependents
of the deceased. Hence this court is of the view that an amount
equal to 1/4th her income can be deducted towards her personal
expenses. The rationale being, through the expansive view on
dependency taken in Birender (Supra) and Shalumol (Supra),
the courts do not discredit the standards for the fraction of
deductions arrived at in Pranay Sethi (Supra).
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd vs Jashuben & Ors on 14 February, 2008
19. Reckoning Jashuben (Supra), the holding in Meenakshi
Mishra (Supra) can thus be distinguished from the facts of the
present case. Since the benefits granted to the deceased were
Travel and Washing Allowances which solely satisfied the
purpose of ameliorating the hassles faced by employees during
their employment, the Appellants cannot gain from such
allowances that the deceased had enjoyed during his
employment. In fact, a perusal of the salary slip of the deceased,
Smt. Kalawati Devi, shows that the salary of the deceased is
inclusive of Dearness Allowance and House Rent Allowance,
which has not been deducted by the learned Claims Tribunal.
From this, it is evident that the learned Claims Tribunal has only
deducted the allowances that were solely for the personal benefit
of the deceased. This court thus concurs with the findings of the
learned Claims Tribunal on the exclusion of Travel and Washing
allowance from the income of the deceased.
National Insurance Company Ltd vs Indira Srivastava & Ors on 12 December, 2007
In National Insurance
Company Ltd. v. Indira Srivastava & Ors], it is
useful to notice, this Court observed :
Erudhaya Priya vs State Express Transport Corporation ... on 27 July, 2020
24.It was averred by the counsel for the Appellants that the rate of
interest awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal should have
been at 9% per annum instead of 7.5% per annum. To
substantiate the same, the counsel had cited several judgements
where the courts have modified the rate of interest granted by the
Tribunals to 9% per annum, such as Erudhaya Priya vs Express
Transport Corporation Ltd reported as 2020 SCC OnLine SC
MAC.APP. 433/2013 Page 16 of 20
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:RITU
DHIRANIA
Signing Date:04.11.2022
15:55:40
NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/004590
601 and Kirti and Anr vs Oriental Insurance Co Ltd, reported as
(2021) 2 SCC 166. The courts in these cases have provided no
reasoning or rationale behind granting such a percentage.
Abati Bezbaruah vs Dy. Director General Geological Survey ... on 14 February, 2003
"Three decisions were cited before us by Mr A.P.
Mohanty, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the Appellant, in support of his contentions. No
ratio has been laid down in any of the decisions in
regard to the rate of interest and the rate of
interest was awarded on the amount of
compensation as a matter of judicial discretion.
The rate of interest must be just and reasonable
depending upon the facts and circumstances of
each case and taking all relevant factors
including inflation, change of economy, policy
being adopted by Reserve Bank of India from time
to time, how long the case is pending, permanent
injuries suffered by the victim, enormity of
suffering, loss of future income, loss of enjoyment
of life etc., into consideration. No rate of interest
is fixed under Section 171 of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988. Varying rates of interest are being
awarded by Tribunals, High Courts and the
Supreme Court. Interest can be granted even if a
claimant does not
specifically plead for the same as it is
consequential in the eye of law. Interest is
compensation for forbearance or detention of
money and that interest being awarded to a party
only for being kept out of the money which ought
to have been paid to him. No principle could be
MAC.APP. 433/2013 Page 17 of 20
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:RITU
DHIRANIA
Signing Date:04.11.2022
15:55:40
NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/004590
deduced nor can any rate of interest be fixed to
have a general application in motor accident
claim cases having regard to the nature of
provision under Section 171 giving discretion to
the Tribunal in such matter. In other matters,
awarding of interest depends upon the statutory
provisions, mercantile usage and doctrine of
equity. Neither Section 34 CPC nor Section 4-
A(3) of the Workmen's Compensation Act are
applicable in the matter of fixing rate of interest
in a claim under the Motor Vehicles Act. The
courts have awarded the interest at different rates
depending upon the facts and circumstances of
each case. Therefore, in my opinion, there cannot
be any hard-and-fast rule in awarding interest
and the award of interest is solely on the
discretion of the Tribunal or the High Court as
indicated above."
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur And Ors. on 30 June, 2020
27.Learned counsel for the Appellants has relied on United India
Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Satinder Kaur, reported as (2021) 11 SCC
780, which affirmed the ruling on the conventional heads in
Pranay Sethi (Supra) for an enhancement of the sum awarded
under the said heads.