Skip to main content

Family of accident victim gets Rs 46 lakh compensation - MACT

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Pune, has awarded a compensation of Rs 46.26 lakh to the husband and 13-year-old son of a 39-year-old woman who was killed in a road accident on the old Pune-Mumbai highway at Pimpri in 2009. They had filed a claim of Rs 40 lakh and the MACT awarded more compensation considering age and earning capacity of the deceased.

MACT member N P Dhote ordered that the compensation be jointly paid by the truck's owner Aruna Jadhav of Pimpri and The Oriental Insurance Company Limited with seven percent interest from the date of filing the petition in 2010 till the realisation of the amount.

The deceased, Swita Devraju (39) of Chinchwad, was serving as a teacher with Hindustan Antibiotics School. She was a permanent employee and earned Rs 26,595 per month. On December 7, 2009, Swita and her friend Asha Bansode were going to Chinchwad via the old Pune-Mumbai highway. Swita was driving the two-wheeler. At around 5.30 pm , a truck came from behind and hit the two-wheeler. Swita died while Bansode sustained injuries.

Based on Bansode's complaint, the Pimpri police station had arrested the truck driver for rash and negligent driving.

In March 2010, Swita's husband Venkatrayyappa (46) and their son Prathmesh moved the MACT seeking Rs 40 lakh compensation. Advocate K K Bandal represented the family.

The truck owner did not appear before the tribunal while the insurance company submitted that the deceased herself was responsible for the accident due to her rash and negligent driving.

However, the judge observed that the accident took place in the middle of a 40-ft wide road and it was not dark at the time of incident.

The judgement said that the truck driver was responsible for rash and negligent driving. While driving heavy vehicle, more particularly on roads passing through cities, extra care is required to be taken. Considering the vicarious liabilty of the truck owner and the insurance company, they have to jointly pay the compensation amount".

Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/Family-of-accident-victim-gets-Rs-46-lakh-compensation/articleshow/20830992.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

Mere Agreement To Sell The Leased Property To Tenant Would Not Terminate Landlord-Tenant Relationship

In CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1237­1238 OF 2019, Dr. H.K. Sharma vs Shri Ram Lal, the tenant had objected against the eviction suit filed by the landlord, claiming that the landlord-tenant relationship between them had ceased to exist by virtue of an agreement for sale entered between them and that he has already paid some money in advance based on the agreement. The tenant contented as the landlord-tenant relationship did not exist, the landlord cannot evict him. The matter went through various forums and finally landed before the Supreme Court in appeal. The Supreme Court referring to the judgment in Shah Mathuradas Maganlal & Co. vs. Nagappa Shankarappa Malage & Ors., held that in the instant case the lease agreement included no clauses on the fate of the tenancy. A fortiori, the parties did not intend to surrender the tenancy rights despite entering into an agreement of sale of the tenanted property. In other words, if the parties really intended to surrender their tenancy ...
2 comments
Read more

Valuation Report of Jewellery once made is effective for Four Assessment Years

The division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Pr.Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. Raghu Hari Dalmia held that a valuation report made by a registered valuer once adopted shall be in effect for four assessment years unless an event has occurred whereby the value is increased or decreased. The High Court made it clear that the event of “search” under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot compel the assessee to undertake a fresh valuation.
2 comments
Read more