Koosappa Poojari vs K. Sadabba And Ors. on 21 November, 2003
In support of his contentions, he has relied upon the decision
reported in ILR 2003 KAR 1104 (Koosappa Poojari Vs Sadabba and others)
wherein it is held as under:-
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.29 seconds)A. Anandan vs Abdul Azeez And Anr. on 17 October, 2003
The counsel for the respondent No.2 also relied upon another
judgment reported in 2004 ACJ 1091 (A.Anandan Vs. Abdul Azeez and
others) wherein it is held thus:
Smt. Rajesh And Others vs Rajbir Singh And Others on 29 January, 2010
In view of the principles liaddown in the judgment reported in
2013 ACJ 1403 (Rajesh Vs. Rajbir Singh), the Apex Court held that even if
a person is self employed, loss of future prospects has to be taken into
consideration. In the case on hand, the deceased was working as Team
Member and getting handsome salary and thus, it can be assumed that the
deceased had a bright future. Further, as the deceased was aged 31 years at
the time of accident, 50%, from out of his income (Rs.16,675/-), has to be
taken as loss of future prospects, which works out to Rs.8,337/- and thus the
total (present income plus loss of future prospects) works out to Rs.25,012/-.
13
Munna Lal Jain & Anr vs Vipin Kumar Sharma & Ors on 15 May, 2015
30. Regarding the deduction to be made towards personal expenses of
the deceased, it appears that the deceased was a bachelor. Further, on
perusal of the cause title to the petition, it can be seen that petitioner No.1 is
the father and petitioner No.2 is the mother and petitioner No.3 is the
younger brother of the deceased. Petitioner No.1 and 2 being the parents of
the deceased, can be said to be the dependant members on the deceased and
the petitioner No.3 cannot be said to a dependant member, since, in the
cross-examination of PW 1, he admits that petitioner No.3 is working as a
coolie. Therefore, petitioner No.1 and 2 were the only dependants on the
income of the deceased. Such being the case, 1/3rd out of the income of the
deceased has to be given deduction, as per the principle laid down in the
case of Munna Lal Jain and another Vs. Vipin Kumar Sharma and others
reported in 2015 AIR SCW 3105, towards the personal expenses of the
deceased had he been alive, if that be so, Rs.8,337/- has to be deducted from
the total income towards the personal income of the deceased, had he been
alive and thus, the total loss of dependency comes to Rs.32,01,600/- (Total
income Rs.25,012/- minus 1/3rd ie., Rs.8337/- towards personal expenses,
balance comes to Rs.16,675 X 12 = 2,00,100 X 16 = 32,01,600/-)
Sanobanu Nazirbhai Mirza & Ors vs Ahmedabad Municipal Transport Service on 3 October, 2013
31. The Apex Court, in the case reported in 2013 ACJ 5800
(Sanobanu Nazirbhai Mirza Vs. Ahmedabad Municipal Transport Service)
and also in the recent judgment reported in AIR 2014 SUPREME COURT
706 (Puttamma Vs. Narayana Reddy) awarded Rs.1,00,000/- as
compensation to the family members (children and family members other
than wife) for loss of love and affection, deprivation of protection, social
security etc., and Rs.10,000/- towards cost incurred on account of funeral
and ritual expenses. In this case also, I deem it proper to award
14
Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation to the family members (children and family
members other than wife) for loss of love and affection, deprivation of
protection, social security etc., and Rs.10,000/- towards cost incurred on
account of funeral and ritual expenses.
Puttamma W/O Lt Ramadas vs K L Narayana Reddy S/O Lt Lakshmaiah ... on 10 March, 2010
31. The Apex Court, in the case reported in 2013 ACJ 5800
(Sanobanu Nazirbhai Mirza Vs. Ahmedabad Municipal Transport Service)
and also in the recent judgment reported in AIR 2014 SUPREME COURT
706 (Puttamma Vs. Narayana Reddy) awarded Rs.1,00,000/- as
compensation to the family members (children and family members other
than wife) for loss of love and affection, deprivation of protection, social
security etc., and Rs.10,000/- towards cost incurred on account of funeral
and ritual expenses. In this case also, I deem it proper to award
14
Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation to the family members (children and family
members other than wife) for loss of love and affection, deprivation of
protection, social security etc., and Rs.10,000/- towards cost incurred on
account of funeral and ritual expenses.
M.C.D vs Asscn.,Victims Of Uphaar Tragedy & Ors on 13 October, 2011
In a case reported in (2011) 4 SCC 481 : (AIR 2012 SC 100)
(Municipal Council of Delhi Vs. Association of Victims of Uphaar
Tragedy), the Supreme Court has held that the Court has to take into account
the rate of interest of the nationalized bank and the present day cost of living
and thereby awarded, interest on the compensation amount at 9% p.a. I have
no reasons to deviate from the said view of the Apex Court. Accordingly,
interest on compensation amount is awarded at 9% p.a. Accordingly, issue
No.3 is answered.