Skip to main content

Accident compensation must restore normalcy as far as possible

The Bombay High Court has observed that the object of awarding monetary compensation to a family which has lost its sole bread-winner is to ensure that the surviving members can lead a normal life at least financially.

"The object of awarding compensation is to restore the dependents/claimants to the pre-accidental position as far as possible by compensating the victim's family in monetary terms for the loss of their only bread-earner member," Justice A P Bhangale said in a ruling last week.

The court increased the compensation awarded to a family from Ratnagiri from Rs 8.8 lakh to Rs 13.8 lakh. The order was passed on an appeal filed by Darshana Kanavaje, who lost her husband, Ganesh, in an accident in 2008 when a state transport bus rammed into him.

In May 2010, the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal at Ratnagiri directed the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation to pay Rs 8.8 lakh to the family, which comprised Darshana, the couple's three minor children, and Ganesh's parents.

Advocate Rajesh Patil, her lawyer, argued that Ganesh, who ran a grocery shop, was a regular Income Tax payer. Ganesh's tax consultant deposed before MACT to state that his income was gradually increasing and his average annual income was calculable at Rs 90,000 per year.

Justice Bhangale, while enhancing the amount, observed that it was the duty of the tribunal to award fair and reasonable compensation.

"In such cases the dependents are often left behind to face impoverishment due to sudden impecunious circumstances after having lost their sole bread-earner. They need to satisfy the basic needs. It is indisputable that increasing inflation makes it increasingly difficult for people to survive," the High Court observed.

Article referred: http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/accident-compensation-must-restore-normalcy-as-far-as-possible-113110700794_1.html

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

When debt is bona fide disputed and the defence is a substantial one, the court will not wind up the company

In SHITAL FIBERS LTD.  vs  INDIAN ACRYLICS LIMITED, as per the respondent, appellant had made a payment of Rs.61,83,218/­. However, there was an outstanding balance of Rs.8,92,723/­ as on 28.7.2008. Since despite repeated requests, balance amount was not paid, the respondent issued a statutory notice to the appellant. The same was duly responded to. As the payment was not made despite notice being duly served on the appellant, the respondent filed the aforesaid Company Petition seeking winding up of the present appellant for its inability to pay admitted debts. The learned Company Judge vide order dated 28.9.2015 admitted the Company Petition. However, while doing so, the learned Company Judge observed, that since the appellant was an on­going concern, an opportunity should be granted to it to settle the accounts with the respondent by 31.12.2015. Only in case of failure of the settlement, the citation was directed to be published. On appeal, the Division Bench of the High Cou...
Post a Comment
Read more

Abusing in-laws a ground for divorce: SC

Abusing in-laws and not allowing them to reside in the matrimonial home by a woman amounts to cruelty to her spouse, ground enough for grant of divorce, the Supreme Court has ruled while allowing an NRI's plea for legal separation from his wife. A bench of Justices Vikaramajit Sen and A M Sapre said such incidents could not be termed as "wear and tear" of family life as held by Madras High Court which had said that a couple must be prepared to face such situations in matrimonial relationship. The NRI had filed a divorce petition alleging that his wife was abusive to his family members and did not allow his parents and siblings to stay in his house when they visited the US. Referring to an incident, the husband told the court that his wife had once locked him and his sister out of the house and abused them saying they belonged to a 'prostitute family'. She refused to allow her sister-in-law to enter the house and even lodged a police complaint against her hu...
4 comments
Read more