Skip to main content

Accident victim awarded Rs. 30 lakh compensation - SC

If a student meets with a road accident and becomes permanently disabled, his/her potential future earnings must be taken into consideration by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunals and High Courts in order to award a just compensation. This was ruled by the Supreme Court while ordering a compensation of Rs. 30.93 lakh to a girl who lost both legs in an accident in 2005 when she was 16 years old.

A Bench of Justices Gyan Sudha Misra (since retired) and V. Gopala Gowda said, “Having regard to the undisputed fact that there has been inflation of money in the country since the occurrence of the accident, the same has to be taken into account by the tribunal. The fact that the appellant [in this case] was a brilliant student at the time of the accident should also be taken into consideration while awarding the compensation to her. Thus, the claimant-appellant, V. Mekala, is entitled to a total amount of Rs. 30.93 lakh as compensation with an interest at 9 per cent per annum.”

The appellant had secured first rank in her Class X exam. The court said the girl would have had a better future in terms of educational career and she could have got a suitable public or private employment. However, on account of the permanent disability she suffered due to the accident, that opportunity is lost to her. “Therefore, she is entitled to compensation under the heads ‘loss of income’ and ‘future prospects’,” the court said.

“In an accident, if a person loses a limb or eye or sustains an injury, the court, while computing damages for the loss of organs or physical injury, does not value a limb or eye in isolation, but values totality of the harm which the loss has entailed,” the Bench said.

In this case, the claimant had been awarded Rs. 6.46 lakh as compensation by the tribunal and the Madras High Court had enhanced it to Rs. 18.22 lakh. She filed the present appeal for further hike in compensation.

Allowing her appeal, the Bench directed the insurance company to deposit 50 per cent of the awarded amount with proportionate interest within four weeks in a nationalised bank and pay the balance 50 per cent within four weeks. The Bench sought compliance report from the insurance company within five weeks thereafter.

Article referred: http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/accident-victim-awarded-rs-30-lakh-compensation/article6003071.ece

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...