Section 106 IEA Cannot Fill the Gaps in a Shaky Prosecution Case: Rajasthan High Court Rebukes Investigative Lapses in Murder Trial Accident Claim | Ration Card Cannot Decide a Man’s Age: Punjab & Haryana High Court Forgery in Wife’s Name and Defiance of Court Orders Amount to Contempt: Kerala High Court Limitation | Selectively Active Litigant Cannot Seek Liberal Condonation: Delhi High Court Refuses to Revive 1589 Days’ Delay Mere Unnatural Death Within Seven Months Is Not Dowry Death: Delhi High Court Refuses to Reverse Acquittal in Ruby Hanging Case A Partition Suit Is a Suit for Land: Bombay High Court Rejects Plaint for Want of Clause XII Leave Senior Citizens Act Cannot Be A Shortcut To Reclaim Property Registered In Wife's Name: Bombay High Court State Bound By Its Concession; More Meritorious Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment: Supreme Court Balances Equity In Rajasthan Grade III Teacher Recruitment Penalty For Delayed Compensation Is The Employer's Personal Fault — Insurance Company Cannot Be Made To Pay For The Employer's Own Default: Supreme Court Bail Cannot Be a Mechanical Exercise in Murder and Atrocities Cases: Supreme Court Cancels Bail Granted on ‘Extraneous Considerations’ Even A Lathi Becomes A Murder Weapon When Repeatedly Aimed At The Head With Bone-Deep Force: Supreme Court Applies The Virsa Singh Test To Demolish The Defence That Lathis Are Not Deadly Weapons Section 149 IPC While Demanding Proof Of Individual Fatal Blow Runs Contrary To The Very Principle Of Vicarious Liability: Supreme Court Statement Under Section 108 Is Substantive Evidence If Voluntary:  Supreme Court Upholds Conviction In Smuggling Case U.P. Anti-Conversion Act Does Not Apply To Interfaith Live-In Relationships Unless Actual Conversion Is Intended: Allahabad High Court Section 480(6) BNSS | If Trial Is Not Concluded Within Sixty Days… Such Person Shall Be Released On Bail: MP High Court Bombay High Court Lifts Stay on Banks’ Fraud Proceedings Against Anil Ambani Preventive Detention Cannot Survive Without Supplying Relied Upon Documents: Karnataka High Court Reasserts Article 22(5) Safeguards Court Subordinate Who Attended Duty Drunk, Abused Advocates & Misbehaved With Judge's Family Gets No Mercy: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Removal From Service XXXVII Rule 3 CPC | Claim Of 24% Interest Without Prima Facie Contract Cannot Be Blindly Accepted In Summary Proceedings : Madras High Court On Summary Suit Defence Re-Testing Under NDPS Act Cannot Be a Tool to Overcome an Adverse Lab Report: J&K High Court Quashes Charge-Sheet After First Report Ruled Out Heroin Shocking And Disturbing That Cows Died Due To Starvation: Kerala High Court Pulls Up Travancore Devaswom Board Over Neglect Of Temple Gosala Promoter Cannot Retain Ownership By Merely Using The Word ‘Lease’: Bombay High Court Upholds Ownership Deemed Conveyance Under MOFA

MADRAS HIGH COURT Enhances Compensation in Motor Vehicle Accident Case, Citing “Serious Errors” in Previous Assessments

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the MADRAS HIGH COURT has enhanced the compensation awarded to a claimant in a motor vehicle accident case. The court noted “serious errors” in the assessments made by the Motor Vehicles Claims Tribunal and the High Court, leading to a lower compensation amount being awarded initially.

The appellant, Sri Lakshmana Gowda B.N., had filed an appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The court heard arguments from both the appellant and the respondent, The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., and examined the records of the case.

Justice Aravind Kumar, delivering the judgment, stated, “The Tribunal committed a serious error in awarding abysmally less compensation contrary to the evidence on record.” The court found that the assessments of the claimant’s income and permanent disability were incorrect, resulting in an unjustifiably low compensation amount.

The court awarded additional compensation for pain and suffering, stating, “The compensation awarded towards ‘pain and suffering’ is on the lower side.” They also considered the claimant’s loss of future income, loss of marriage prospects, and loss of earnings during the laid-up period, recalculating the compensation amounts for these factors.

“The Tribunal fell in error in construing the income of the claimant at Rs. 3,000/- p.m. instead of Rs. 8,000/- p.m.,” the court emphasized, highlighting the incorrect assessment of the claimant’s income.

 The final compensation awarded by the High Court was Rs. 15,94,812, with interest at 6% per annum. The court directed The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. To deposit the awarded amount within six weeks.

 Date of Decision: 06.03.2023

S.Amalraj  VS .State

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/amalraj-v-state-06-March-23-Karnt.-HC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News