Mere Entry, Abuse Or Assault Is Not Civil Contempt – Willfulness And Dispossession Must Be Clearly Proved: Bombay High Court Magistrate Cannot Shut Eyes To Final Report After Cognizance – Supplementary Report Must Be Judicially Considered Before Framing Charges: Allahabad High Court Examination-in-Chief Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction Amid Serious Doubts: Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal in Grievous Hurt Case Employees Cannot Pick Favourable Terms and Reject the Rest: Bombay High Court Upholds SIDBI’s Cut-Off Date for Pension to CPF Optees Cannot Reclaim Absolute Ownership After Letting Your Declaration Suit Fail: AP High Court Enforces Finality in Partition Appeal Death Due to Fat Embolism and Delayed Treatment Is Not Culpable Homicide: Orissa High Court Converts 30-Year-Old 304 Part-I Conviction to Grievous Hurt Fabricated Lease Cannot Be Sanctified by Consolidation Entry: Orissa High Court Dismisses 36-Year-Old Second Appeal Rules of the Game Were Never Changed: Delhi High Court Upholds CSIR’s Power to Prescribe Minimum Threshold in CASE-2023 Resignation Does Not Forfeit Earned Pension: Calcutta High Court Declares Company Superannuation Benefit as ‘Wages’ Under Law Fraud Vitiates Everything—Stranger Can File Independent Suit Against Compromise Decree: Bombay High Court Refuses to Reject 49-Year-Old Challenge at Threshold Mere Long Possession By One Co-Owner Does Not Destroy The Co-Ownership Right Of The Other: Madras High Court State Cannot Hide Behind An Illegal Undertaking: Punjab & Haryana High Court Questions Denial Of Retrospective Regularization

"Motor Accident Claims: High Court Revises Compensation, Cites 'Discretion of the Court' in Personal Expense Deduction"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


 August 17, 2023 - In a landmark decision, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has granted a total compensation of Rs. 8,44,508 to Daya alias Dayawanti, the widow of Sarwan Kumar who died in a motor vehicular accident. The Court observed, "it is the discretion of the court to decide the deduction for personal expenses," and decided that a deduction of 1/3rd for personal expenses would be just and fair in this case.

Daya alias Dayawanti had filed an appeal for the modification of the award dated 28.02.2007, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT). She sought an enhancement of the amount of compensation initially awarded by the Tribunal, which was Rs. 3,79,000. The accident had occurred on January 10, 2005, when a canter collided with Sarwan Kumar's truck, leading to his immediate death.

The key issues addressed by the Court included the determination of the monthly salary of the deceased, enhancement of the income on account of future prospects, the deduction of personal expenses, and compensation on account of loss of estate.

Justice Sanjay Vashisth stated, "The income of the deceased should have been assessed according to the DC rates prevalent at the time of the accident, which were Rs. 5,812.75/- per month." The Court also emphasized that in cases where there is only one dependent, the deduction for personal expenses is at the discretion of the court.

The Court partly modified the award of the Tribunal and granted a total compensation of Rs. 8,44,508 to the appellant, along with an interest rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition. The appeal was allowed with the terms indicated in the judgement.

The judgement cited several key cases, including Smt. Sarla Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, Sangtari Muleem v. Karnail Singh, National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Ors., and Smt. Anjali and others v. Lokendra Rathod and others.

This decision is seen as a significant step in ensuring fair compensation for victims or their families in motor accident cases.

D.D- August 17, 2023

Daya @ Dayawanti vs Arjun and others

 

Latest Legal News