Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
JITENDRA KUMAR
Sahdeo Prasad @ Ravindra Kumar. S/o Late Lal Kishun Singh – Appellant
Versus
English Prasad, S/o Lal Mohan Rai – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
The present Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act has been preferred by the appellants, who were Claimants before the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, against the judgment/award dated 18.06.2013, passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-XIV- cum-Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patna in Claim Case No. 31 of 2010, whereby learned Tribunal has awarded the compensation of Rs. 2,73,500/- to the Claimants, who are appellants herein, payable by the Insurance Company, who is Respondent No. 3 herein, along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim case i.e. 19.01.2010. The appellants have filed this appeal for higher amount of compensation. However, they have already received the total amount of the compensation with protest from the Insurance Company (Respondent No.3 herein) as granted by learned Tribunal by the impugned award.
2. The factual background of the case is that the Claimants (appellants herein) filed a claim case bearing No. 31 of 2010 for compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- against the owner and driver of the Mini Bus bearing Registration No. BR-21B- 6744 viz., Rajiv Ranjan Kumar and English Prasad respecti
The court established that compensation in accident cases must reflect loss of dependency, age, and conventional heads as outlined in precedents, leading to a final compensation amounting to Rs. 5,40....
The court clarified that future prospects must be factored into compensation calculations for accident victims, aligning with established legal principles for just compensation.
Compensation for loss of dependency must include future prospects, the appropriate multiplier must reflect the deceased's age, and conventional heads should follow established judicial guidelines.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Rule 220-A(3) of the Rules of 1998 for determining future prospects and the use of the multiplier as per the Second Schedule to ....
Point of Law : A child, who has advanced into matured adulthood, is married or otherwise in the mainstream of life, would not be entitled to compensation under that head.
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
