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
Electricity law

UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED AND ANOTHER versus ADANI POWER (MUNDRA) LIMITED AND ANOTHER

The Appellate Tribunal erred in holding that the CIL communication dated 19 June 2013 permitting Inter Plant Transfer was not a 'Change in Law'; the communication reflected a decision of Coal India Limited (an instrumentality of the Government of India) taken at its board meeting and therefore falls within the PPA's broad definition of 'Law' and constitutes a 'Change in Law'. Consequently IPT is a Change in Law; Change in Law compensation for domestic coal shortfall is to be calculated as ACQ minus actual supply; the matter is remitted to CERC to work out the effect and quantify benefits to a…

Source excerpt

  • Change in law
  • Inter plant transfer (ipt)
  • Assured coal quantity (acq)
  • Fuel supply agreement (fsa)
  • New coal distribution policy 2007
  • Compensation calculation
Read case analysis
Motor vehicles law

SMT. SUNITA TOKAS & ANR. versus NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR.

The multiplier for calculating compensation in motor accident cases under s.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 must be based on the age of the deceased, not the dependants, even in the case of a bachelor. Notional income must reflect the deceased’s skill and potential, and future prospects at 40% must also be added as per settled law.

Source excerpt

  • Compensation calculation
  • Multiplier application
  • Notional income
  • Future prospects in motor accident claims
Read case analysis
Consumer protection

NAND KISHORE PRASAD versus DR. MOHIB HAMIDI & OTHERS

Operating upon the patient with a very low platelet count was unreasonable and amounted to medical negligence. The hospital’s liability is vicarious for acts of the operating surgeon during the course of employment; entire compensation of Rs.6 lakhs is just and should be paid by the hospital.

Source excerpt

  • Vicarious liability
  • Compensation calculation
  • Medical negligence standard
Read case analysis
Railways

UNION OF INDIA versus RADHA YADAV

Where accident occurred before amendment, compensation must be calculated as per the pre-amendment schedule with reasonable interest. If this sum is less than the prescribed amount on the date of award, the higher figure should be awarded. Thus, awarding interest on the revised sum was erroneous.

Source excerpt

  • Railway accidents
  • Compensation calculation
  • Beneficial legislation
  • Strict liability
Read case analysis
Motor vehicle accident claims

SEBASTIANI LAKRA & ORS. versus NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ANR.

Payments received under the Employees Family Benefit Scheme cannot be deducted from compensation under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, since they arise from the deceased's lifetime acts or contracts, not from the accident. However, in light of the substantial benefit, claimants are not entitled to an additional amount for future prospects; compensation assessed at Rs. 50,00,000/- with 9% interest p.a. from petition date till payment.

Source excerpt

  • Compensation calculation
  • Pecuniary advantage deduction
  • Multiplier method
  • Just compensation
Read case analysis
Motor accident

ANANT SON OF SIDHESHWAR DUKRE versus PRATAP SON OF ZHAMNNAPPA LAMZANE & ANOTHER

The Supreme Court held that the compensation must restore the injured person as far as possible to his pre-accident position, including proper assessment under the multiplier method based on actual income and degree of disability affecting earning capacity, with amounts specifically enhanced for loss of future income, medical expenses, attendance, special diet, amenities, and pain and suffering, with interest.

Source excerpt

  • Motor vehicles act, 1988
  • Permanent disability
  • Compensation calculation
  • Multiplier method
Read case analysis
Motor accident claims

VIJAY KUMAR RASTOGI versus UTTAR PRADESH STATE ROADWAYS TRANSPORT CORPORATION

The Court held that for determining compensation under loss of income and loss of future income, income from other sources such as bank interest and commission, as disclosed in the income tax return, should be included, and the exclusion of these by the Tribunal and affirmation by the High Court was erroneous. The compensation should be calculated based on the taxable income minus income tax, and the appellant is entitled to enhanced compensation under these heads.

Source excerpt

  • Compensation calculation
  • Loss of income
  • Future income loss
  • Damages
  • Interest rate
Read case analysis
Motor vehicles

SHRI NAGAR MAL AND ORS. versus THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ORS.

The Tribunal’s assessment of income was correct as the income certificates were not proved, but the appropriate multiplier should be 17 based on the age of the deceased and 40% should be added for future prospects; resulting in a recalculation of compensation.

Source excerpt

  • Motor accident claims
  • Compensation calculation
  • Loss of dependency
  • Multiplier selection
  • Future prospects
Read case analysis
Motor accident claims

N. MANJEGOWDA versus THE MANAGER, THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.

Functional disability for a professional advocate cannot be determined solely by percentage of physical disability; 70% loss of earning and a multiplier of 16 are appropriate, thus compensation must be enhanced over the High Court's reduced amount.

Source excerpt

  • Compensation calculation
  • Loss of future earnings
  • Functional disability
  • Multiplier method
Read case analysis
Consumer law

DR. BALRAM PRASAD versus DR. KUNAL SAHA & ORS.

The Supreme Court held that the claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation due to inflation and devaluation, that additional claims can be made even by affidavit under Court's powers, and that there was no contributory negligence by the claimant. The hospital and doctors were found vicariously and directly liable for medical negligence, and compensation was to be awarded under various heads, partly modifying the National Commission's order, and directing payment with interest from the date of complaint.

Source excerpt

  • Medical negligence
  • Compensation calculation
  • Contributory negligence
  • Just and fair compensation
  • Liability of hospitals and doctors
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.