Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.28 seconds)
Mamta Pandey vs Rajesh on 1 April, 2025 cites

National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Pranay Sethi on 31 October, 2017

41. Pertinently, the Hon'ble Apex Court has also held in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi (Supra) that compensation awarded under the conventional heads shall be enhanced at the rate of 10% in every three years and a period of 6 years since then stands already expired. Hence, the petitioners in this case are also entitled to an increase @ 10% on the amount awarded under the conventional head of 'loss of estate', 'funeral charges' and 'loss of consortium' after expiry of three years and further 10% after expiry of another three years. The petitioners are thus awarded a total sum of Rs.2,29,900/- [(Rs.40,000/- + 10% of Rs.40,000/-= Rs. 44,000/- + 10% of Rs. 44,000/- = Rs. 48,400/- X 4 = Rs.1,93,600/-) + (Rs. 30,000/- + 10% of Rs.30,000/- = Rs.33,000/- + 10% of Rs. 33,000/- = Rs. 36,300/-)] under this head.
Supreme Court of India Cites 32 - Cited by 9815 - D Misra - Full Document

Bimla Devi & Ors vs Himachal Road Transport Corpn. & Ors on 15 April, 2009

24. It is well settled that the procedure followed for proceedings conducted by an accident tribunal is similar to that followed by a Civil Court and in Civil matters, the facts are required to be established on preponderance of probabilities and not beyond reasonable doubt, as are required in a criminal prosecution. Reference in this regard is made to the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court reported as (2009) 13 SC 530 in Bimla Devi and others Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation and others, wherein it has been observed that strict proof of an accident caused by a particular vehicle in a particular manner may not be possible to be done by the petitioners and the petitioners were merely to establish their case on the touchstone of preponderance of probability.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 2658 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Smt Sarla Dixit & Anr vs Balwant Yadav & Ors on 29 February, 1996

13. Taking into account the multiplier as prescribed in Sarla Dixit (supra), and taking the age of the appellant as 25 years for purposes of the multiplier slab stipulated therein, it is held that the multiplier to be adopted was 18, which is applicable to the age group of 21-25, and the learned Tribunal has erred in adopting the multiplier of 17 for determining compensation. The Impugned Award is modified to the above limited extent."
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 794 - S B Majmudar - Full Document

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur And Ors. on 30 June, 2020

Further, in view of Full Court judgment dated 30.06.2020 passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in United India Insurance Co. Vs. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur & Ors. (2020) 06 SC CK 0036 (Civil Appeal Nos. 2705 and 2706 of 2020), the petitioners are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each towards 'loss of consortium', in addition to Rs.30,000/- granted under the conventional head of MACP No. 52/17 Mamta Pandey & Ors. Vs. Rajesh & Ors. 01.04.2025 Page 16 of 25 'loss of estate' and 'funeral expenses'.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 1453 - I Malhotra - Full Document

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs Kashmiri Lal And Ors. on 9 December, 2005

In case even after lapse of 90 days from today, respondent no. 3 fails to deposit this compensation with interest, in that event, in light of judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi passed in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Kashmiri Lal 2007 ACJ 688, this compensation shall be recovered by attaching the bank account of respondent no. 3 with a cost of Rs.5,000/-.
Delhi High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 1437 - M Mudgal - Full Document
1   2 Next