SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1984 Supreme(AP) 314

M.JAGANNADHA RAO, B.P.JEEVAN REDDY
Chairman, A. P. S. R. T. C. , Hyderabad – Appellant
Versus
Shafiya Khatoon – Respondent


JAGANNADHA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE following questions arise for consideration in this appeal as to how compensation under S. 110-B of the Motor Vehicles Act is to be computed, what is meant by loss to the dependency and how is the multiplier to be chosen, what is meant by the loss to he estate and how is it to be computed, can the compensation be shared by the dependents not enumerated under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 and finally as to how the compensation is to be apportioned?

( 2 ) THE deceased Mohd. Mahfooz was a carpenter when he died, he was aged 22 years. The accident occurred at 9. 45 p. m. on 14-11-1977 at Hanamakonda when a bus belonging to the appellant Corporation bearing the number APZ 8330 knocked down the deceased. The deceased was admitted in the Mahatma Gandhi Hospital, Warangal and he expired on 21-11-1977 in the hospital at 9. 00 p. m. The deceased was a carpenter owning a carpentry shop at Hunter Road and was earning Rs. 400. 00 to Rs. 500. 00 per month. He left behind him his mother and four unmarried sisters as his heirs and dependents who filed O. P. No. 11/1978 on 5-61978 claiming Rs. 72, 000. 00 towards the dependency, at the rate of Rs. 1500. 00 p. a. for 48 y










































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top