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

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more

No Rebate For Stamp Duty Paid In Another State - Bombay HC

A three judge bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Bombay HC) in a recent judgment in the matter of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune and Superintendent of Stamp (Headquarters), Mumbai v Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai and Reliance Petroleum Limited, Gujarat1 has held that orders in case of a scheme of arrangement under Section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) involving different High Courts in multiple states, are separate instruments in themselves. Accordingly, stamp duty would be payable on all the orders (and consequently, all the states) without the benefit of remission, rebate or set-off.
Post a Comment
Read more

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