LAXMI DEVI & OTHERS versus MOHAMMAD TABBAR & ANOTHER
Given the age of the deceased (35 years), the increased notional income, and the low interest rate of 6%, a multiplier of 14 is appropriate instead of 12 as adopted by the High Court.
- Parties
- Appellants: Laxmi Devi & Others; Respondents: Mohammad Tabbar & Another
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 25 March 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Decision (final Judgment and Order Dated 31.8.2006 of High Court of Uttaranchal at Nainital in A.o. No. 154 of 2006)
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed.
- Legal Topics
- Claim for Compensation in Motor Accident Death, Assessment of Notional Income, Application of Multiplier in Compensation Calculation, Interest on Compensation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Laxmi Devi & Others
Appellants
Mohammad Tabbar & Another
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Decision (final Judgment and Order Dated 31.8.2006 of High Court of Uttaranchal at Nainital in A.o. No. 154 of 2006)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court erred in reducing the multiplier from 16 (applied by the Tribunal) to 12 while increasing notional income in compensation calculation for motor accident death case.
- 2 What is the appropriate multiplier to be used, given the age of the deceased and the rate of interest awarded?
Ratio Decidendi
Given the age of the deceased (35 years), the increased notional income, and the low interest rate of 6%, a multiplier of 14 is appropriate instead of 12 as adopted by the High Court.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed.
Orders
- Compensation set at Rs. 3,45,000/- (including funeral, consortium, and estate loss).
- Interest at 6% per annum from the date of claim petition.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment