Skip to main content

Widow who has remarried entitled to relief, Bombay HC says

Just because a woman has remarried does not disentitle her from receiving compensation for the accidental death of her first husband, the Bombay high court has ruled. Six years after a Vile Parle resident Sandeep Purandare died when a dumper hit his bike on the Western Express Highway, a division bench of Justice S C Dharmadhikari and Justice R Y Ganoo ordered that 20 per cent of the compensation amount of over Rs 67 lakh will go to his widow Sunita (name changed), who has since remarried and looks after the couple's child.

"Nothing has been pointed out to us in law which would disable Sunita to claim compensation only because she has remarried during the proceedings before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal," said the judges, adding, "The law postulates grant of just compensation to the claimants. That she was married to deceased Sandip and had given birth to a girl child is undisputed. That she has lost the company of Sandip and will have to take care of the child even after remarriage ought to have therefore weighed with the Tribunal while awarding compensation."

The court ordered that a large part of the compensation amount to be paid by the insurance company and the owner of the dumper -- 60 per cent -- would go to the couple's 11-year-old daughter. "We hold that she would require (a) substantial amount for her education, marriage and for day-to-day maintenance. It is possible that she would require (a) substantial amount for her education such as education in medical/engineering faculty," said the judges, ordering that her share of the compensation be deposited in a nationalised bank.

The interest would be paid to Sunita to take care of her daughter's expenses and withdraw some part for higher education. The remaining amount would be paid to the daughter when she attains adulthood. The court ordered that the remaining 20 per cent of the compensation should go to Sandip's mother.

Sandip, who used to work with L&T, was riding his bike on the Western Express Highway on July 5, 2007 when a dumper truck hit him at the Gold Spot junction, killing him. The accidents tribunal awarded the family compensation of Rs 30 lakh. The family filed an appeal before the high court. The court agreed the calculations were not done properly and the rise in income if Sandip had been alive, too, was not taken into account. The HC increased the compensation amount to Rs 66.98 lakh, along with interest, and also ordered that the family should be paid an additional amount of Rs 30,000 as litigation costs.

Article referred: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-12-19/india/45376440_1_compensation-amount-motor-accidents-claims-tribunal-sandip

Comments

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.

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.

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...