Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

High Court of Delhi Enhances Compensation for Traffic Accident Victim, Recognizes Practical Challenges in Proving Domestic Workers’ Income

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


 In a significant judgment, the High Court of Delhi has revised the compensation awarded to Smt. Geeta, a victim of a traffic accident involving an auto-rickshaw. The court notably increased the compensation from Rs. 6,57,197 to Rs. 9,58,519, recognizing the unique challenges faced by domestic workers in proving their income.

Justice Anish Dayal, presiding over the case, observed, “The requirement of proof even in situations where there are unskilled workers are paid in cash, cannot work to the prejudice of the claimant.” This statement highlights the court’s sensitivity to the realities of informal employment, particularly in domestic work, where formal documentation of wages is often absent.

The case, SMT GEETA VERSUS MOHD JAMALUDDIN & ORS, revolved around the appellant Smt. Geeta’s claim for compensation following a severe accident on July 19, 2005. Suffering extensive injuries, including a 71% permanent disability, the appellant initially faced challenges in her claim due to the absence of formal proof of her income as a domestic worker.

The High Court’s decision marks a departure from the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal’s (MACT) earlier judgment. While MACT had based the compensation on minimum wages, citing the lack of documentary evidence of the appellant’s claimed income, the High Court took a more empathetic view.

Justice Dayal further added, “A domestic servant will be paid in cash and there will be no documentation either on the side of the employer or the employee for receipt of such wages.” This acknowledgment has been hailed by legal experts as a progressive step towards understanding the nuances of unorganized labor sectors.

The court also addressed other aspects of the case, such as the functional disability assessment, which it increased to 60% from the original 71% permanent disability, considering the appellant’s occupation and the extent of her injuries.

Decision:    18 December, 2023

SMT GEETA VS MOHD JAMALUDDIN & ORS       

 

Latest Legal News