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

2015 Supreme(Del) 55

G.P.MITTAL
Gudia – Appellant
Versus
Mukesh – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants:O.P. Mannie, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Advocate (presence not given).

Judgment :-

G.P. Mittal, J. (Oral):

1. The Appellants seek enhancement of compensation of Rs.5,83,000/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) for the death of Hem Raj who succumbed to fatal injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 24.07.2007 at about 11:15 p.m. near Mukarba Chowk, G.T. Road, Delhi.

2. In the absence of any appeal by the Insurance Company or the owner and driver of the vehicle, finding on negligence reached by the Claims Tribunal has attained finality.

3. A very short submission is raised by Mr. O.P. Mannie, the learned counsel for the Appellants. It is urged that the deceased was a self-employed person and was earning Rs.8,000/- per month at the time of his death. Even if the Claims Tribunal took minimum wages of an unskilled employee in the absence of any proof of income for arriving at the amount of compensation, there ought to have been an addition of 50% towards future prospects. Reliance is placed on a three Judge Bench decision in Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54 and Santosh Khandelwal & Ors. v. Abbas & Ors., MAC.APP.31/2010. It is urged that future prospects granted in case of a p






























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