Back
SUBHENDU SAMANTA
Uttara Gorai – Appellant
Versus
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Subhendu Samanta, J.
1. The instant appeal has been preferred against the judgment and award dated April 10, 2012 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, 2nd Court, Bankura, in M.A.C. case No. 35/44 of 2011/2009.
2. The brief fact of the case is that the present appellant being the claimant preferred an application before the learned Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for getting compensation from the Insurance Company on the ground that their predecessor died in a road traffic accident due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle duly insured under the policy of the insurance company. The claim was contested by the Insurance Company by filing written statement.
3. After hearing the parties, the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.2,85,000/- in favour of the claimants and directed the present respondent no.1 to pay the compensation.
4. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned award, the present application has been preferred by the claimant for enhancement of the compensation.
5. Learned advocate for the appellants submits that award passed by the learned Tribunal is erroneous. The learned Tri
Proper assessment of compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act requires consideration of relevant evidence, application of Supreme Court observations on future prospects and general da....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the proper assessment of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, including the deceased's income, future prospects, and suitable multipliers,....
The appropriate income, future prospects, and multiplier for calculating compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act were determined based on legal principles established in previous cases.
The court emphasized the need for a proper assessment of the deceased's income and considered the entitlement to future prospects and general damages under Section 166 of the M.V. Act.
Proper evidence and documentation are crucial for assessing compensation under Section 166 of the M.V. Act.
There is no justification for the learned Tribunal to award interest from date of filing the evidence on affidavit.
The court redefined the deceased's age for compensation calculation from 38 to 46 years and adjusted future earnings based on appropriate deductions, ultimately revising the compensation awarded by t....
Liability of the Insurance Company in the absence of fitness certificate and permit for the vehicle, and proper assessment of the deceased's income for determining compensation.
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
