Back
T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO
Pentimani Ramana – Appellant
Versus
S. Sekhar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO, J.
1. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 03.12.2014 in M.V.O.P. No. 813 of 2012 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Vizianagaram (for short “the tribunal”) whereby the tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 46,239/- with interest at 7.5% from the date of petition till realization against respondents 1 to 3 jointly and severally, the claimant has preferred the present appeal.
2. For convenience, the parties herein will be referred to as per their rankings in the M.V.O.P.
3. The claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- on account of the injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 15.03.2012.
4. The claimant's case is that on 15.03.2012, at about 5.00 p.m. when the claimant and his relatives travelling from Peda Thadivada to Denkada, the first respondent drove his car bearing No. AP-37-C-7766 (hereinafter referred to as the “offending vehicle”) in rash and negligent manner and at high speed without blowing the horn, dashed the claimant's motorcycle. The claimant fell on the road and sustained injuries. Immediately, he was t
Permanent disability must be assessed concerning its actual impact on earning capacity, rather than a mechanical application of percentages.
The loss of earning capacity of a claimant in a motor vehicle accident should be computed on the basis of loss of functional disability, and not on the basis of permanent disability.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
