Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 19 (0.27 seconds)
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs Moharman & Anr. on 22 January, 2024 cites

M/S New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs Mohd. Ajmer & Anr. on 10 May, 2018

―This is the basic premise and once that is grasped, it clearly follows that the same injury or loss may affect two different persons in different ways. Take the case of a marginal farmer who does his cultivation work himself and ploughs his land with his own two hands; or the puller of a cycle-rickshaw, one of the main means of transport in hundreds of small towns all over the country. The loss of one of the legs either to the marginal farmer or the cycle- rickshaw -puller would be the end of the road insofar as their earning capacity is concerned. But in case of a person engaged in some kind of desk work in an office, the Signature Not Verified FAO 17/2021, FAO 21/2021 & FAO 305/2022 Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD Page 29 of 31 KUMAR VATS Signing Date:23.01.2024 20:29:07 loss of a leg may not have the same effect.‖ The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in a judgment in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Ajmer - FAO 259 of 2013 it has been ruled that a driver with injury in his leg having disablement to the extent of 30% is certainly a case of 100% loss of earning capacity. This is because of the reason that he is no more capable to drive a transport vehicle.
Delhi High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - N Waziri - Full Document

Pratap Narain Singh Deo vs Srinivas Sabata And Anr on 4 December, 1975

The documents and the Medical Certificate show that the claimant may not be able to do any physical work of the nature. In this regard, the question as to reduction in earning capacity was argued by both the parties. Ld. Counsel for the claimant argued that the as the workman was a driver by his occupation which he was doing prior to the accident, after the accident he is no more in a position to continue with his occupation this be so this is a case of 100% loss of earning capacity. Finding the nature work, it should be accepted that it is case of 100% disablement and in this regard the Ld. Counsel for the claimant has relied on the ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India - Pratap Narain Singh vs. Srinivasa Sabata cited at 1976 ACJ 141 whereby the Apex Court has held that the workman was no more in a position do take up and do that work which he was doing hence the disablement was assessed 100%.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 944 - P N Shinghal - Full Document

National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Shri Ranjit Singh @ Rana & Anr. on 26 November, 2009

Similarly, in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Shri Ranjit Singh Rana FAO No. 246/2007 delivered on 26.11.2009 again considered the physical disability of 15% as 100% functional disability. In the present case, however, the Signature Not Verified FAO 17/2021, FAO 21/2021 & FAO 305/2022 Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD Page 25 of 31 KUMAR VATS Signing Date:23.01.2024 20:29:07 disability is 31% in the right lower limb which obviously would compromise safe driving of any motor vehicle. The employment of a driver suffering from such a severe physical disability is a too remote, indeed almost negligible. Therefore, would have to be treated as a 100% functional disability entitling the claimant to the award which has been granted."
Delhi High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 2 - V B Gupta - Full Document

Rayapati Venkateswara Rao vs Mantai Sambasiva Rao And Anr. on 30 November, 2000

The Ld. Counsel of the claimant has drawn my attention and has placed the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case titled as National Insurance Co. vs. Pappu & Anr., FAO 289/2004 - Pappu was working as cleaner and in the case partial physical disablement he was held entitled for 100% loss of earning capacity and another judgment of Hon'ble High Court Andhra Pradesh in the case titled as Rayapati Venkateswara Rao vs. Mantai Sambasiva Rao & Anr., cited at II (2001) ACC 300, decided by Hon'ble High Court of Kerala per Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana, the applicant was employed as cleaner on the truck and he was entitled for 100% loss of earning capacity.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 5 - Cited by 18 - N V Ramana - Full Document

Karnataka State Road Transport ... vs Smt Sujatha W/O H D Parashurama on 27 August, 2010

12. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently urged that the learned Commissioner had rightly found that the claimants/respondent No.1 had suffered permanent disability, which have rendered the injured workmen/claimants incapable of gaining any employment as a driver, and therefore, loss of earning capacity @100% was rightly assessed. Learned counsel for the respondent placed reliance on the decisions in Pratap Narain Singh Deo v. Srinias Sabta & Anr.11, National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Ranjit Singh @ Rana & Anr.12, National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Hari Om13, Mohan Soni v. Ram Avtar Tomar & Ors.14, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Mohd. Ajmer15, North East Karnataka Road Transport Corporation v. Sujatha16 and Chanappa Nagappa Muchalagoda v. Divisional Manager, New India Insurance Company Limited17.
Karnataka High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 264 - B S Gowda - Full Document

Sri Chanappa Nagappa Muchalagoda vs Divisional Manager New India Insurance ... on 10 December, 2019

31. The aforesaid evolvement of compensatory jurisprudence over the years settles the issue as to the assessment of loss of earning capacity. However, I shall lastly refer to the decision in Chanappa Nagappa Muchalagoda (supra) wherein, the workman was a driver of heavy vehicle aged about 33 years, who suffered from serious injuries to his right leg in the nature of an anterior cruciate ligament and a collateral ligament tear and was subjected to plastic surgery that resulted in permanent disability, which was medically opined to be 37%.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 33 - I Malhotra - Full Document
1   2 Next