Esheria India Case Law
Sign in
India Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

India Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter India case law

Results update automatically as you type.

India decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Motor vehicles act, 1988

PREETHA KRISHNAN & ORS. versus THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS.

A split multiplier is not to be adopted as a matter of course and is a concept foreign to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988; compensation must be calculated on the basis of the income as on the date of death and split multiplier can only be used in exceptional circumstances with such circumstances recorded; ordinary superannuation/retirement does not constitute such an exceptional circumstance, and Pranay Sethi directives (including enhancement under conventional heads) must be followed; accordingly the Tribunal award is modified to reflect these principles and the compensation is enhanced to Rs.4…

Source excerpt

  • Split multiplier
  • Calculation of compensation
  • Future prospects
  • Multiplier application
  • Superannuation and retirement
Read case analysis
Motor vehicles act, 1988

SUNITA & ORS. versus VINOD SINGH & ORS.

The Court held that on the material before it the monthly income of the deceased should be computed as family pension (Rs.5,137) plus notional wages (Rs.2,500) rounded to Rs.7,000 per month, applied multiplier 14 for age 45 (as per post-mortem), allowed deduction for personal expenses at 1/4th, awarded future prospects at 25%, increased funeral expenses and quantified loss of love and affection and other heads, resulting in total compensation of Rs.13,82,500 with interest at 7.5% p.a., and set aside the impugned High Court order to that extent.

Source excerpt

  • Compensation
  • Multiplier
  • Deduction for personal expenses
  • Monthly income
  • Loss of dependency
  • Expenses for funeral and transportation
Read case analysis
Motor vehicles act

K.S. MURALIDHAR versus R. SUBBULAKSHMI & ANR.

Both the Tribunal and the High Court were correct in treating the claimant's functional disability as 100%; the High Court's computation of future prospects was modified to apply a 50% addition under Pranay Sethi; the award under 'pain and suffering' was enhanced to Rs.15,00,000 given the severity and lifelong nature of the disability; interest at 6% to run from the date of filing of the petition for special leave; total amount payable fixed at Rs.1,02,29,241; appeal allowed.

Source excerpt

  • Pain and suffering
  • Loss of future prospects
  • Disability assessment
  • Quantum of compensation
  • Restitutio ad integrum
Read case analysis
Motor vehicles act, 1988

RAHUL versus NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER

The Supreme Court held that the High Court's reduction of the disability percentage from 25% (as fixed by the Tribunal) to 20% was unsupported by plausible reasons given the medical records, surgery with plates and screws, the disability certificate stating 50% permanent disablement, and the doctor's testimony; accordingly the High Court judgment was set aside and the Tribunal's award fixing disability at 25% was restored, with directions to the insurance company to deposit the compensation and interest within four weeks.

Source excerpt

  • Disability assessment
  • Compensation
  • Reduction of disability percentage
  • Pillion rider
Read case analysis
Motor accident compensation

SUDARSAN PUHAN versus JAYANTA KU. MOHANTY & ANR. ETC.

The High Court failed to discharge its legal obligation as a first appellate court to provide a reasoned judgment addressing all factual and legal issues and evidence, thereby making its reduction of compensation unsustainable. The case is to be remanded to the High Court for fresh adjudication on the merits of the claimant’s appeal for enhancement.

Source excerpt

  • Motor vehicles act—appeals and compensation determination
  • Code of civil procedure—appellate powers and procedure
Read case analysis
Motor accident compensation

SANTOSH DEVI AND ORS. versus MAHAVEER SINGH AND ORS.

The Supreme Court held that the MACT's assessment of income was too low; income should be Rs.2,500/- per month, with a multiplier of 16 and 40% added for future prospects, recomputing total compensation to Rs.5,23,000/- with 9% interest from petition date.

Source excerpt

  • Assessment of income
  • Multiplier for compensation
  • Future prospects
  • Deduction for personal expenses
Read case analysis
Motor accident compensation

FIRDAUS versus ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS.

Even upon presumed transfer of vehicle ownership, insurance policy liability continues for third party compensation under Section 157 of Motor Vehicles Act; setting aside the Workmen Compensation Commissioner’s award was erroneous and unnecessary.

Source excerpt

  • Workmen compensation
  • Third party insurance liability
  • Transfer of vehicle ownership
  • Section 157 motor vehicles act
Read case analysis
Motor accident compensation

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. versus GAJENDER YADAV AND ORS.

Compensation for permanent disability should be calculated by applying appropriate multiplier to the functional disability factor, avoiding duplication, and including costs for artificial limb replacement.

Source excerpt

  • Quantum of compensation
  • Permanent disability
  • Loss of earnings
  • Future prospects
Read case analysis
Motor accident compensation

MALATI SARDAR versus NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ORS.

In motor accident claims, claim petitions may be filed before tribunals having jurisdiction where the insurance company has a business office, irrespective of where the accident occurred or claimant resides, unless prejudice or failure of justice is shown. Absence of failure of justice makes technical objections regarding territorial jurisdiction unsustainable.

Source excerpt

  • Territorial jurisdiction
  • Section 166(2) motor vehicles act 1988
  • Failure of justice
  • Tribunal jurisdiction
Read case analysis
Motor accident compensation

JITENDRA KHIMSHANKAR TRIVEDI & ORS. versus KASAM DAUD KUMBHAR & ORS.

Courts are obligated to award just and reasonable compensation for fatal motor accidents, including recognition of the economic value of homemaker services; reasonable income fixed at Rs.3,000 per month, 1/3 deduction for personal expenses, multiplier of 18 applied; conventional heads awarded in accordance with established precedents; enhanced compensation can be granted under Article 142 for complete justice even absent claimant's appeal.

Source excerpt

  • Compensation for fatal accidents
  • Assessment of income for homemakers
  • Enhancement of compensation
  • Just and reasonable compensation
  • Interest rates on compensation
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

India decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.