Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J.C. DOSHI
Sukhiben Wd/o Jayantibhai Bachubhai Rathwa – Appellant
Versus
Kaushikkumar Manvarbhai Bhagat – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accident details and deceased's role (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. claimants' arguments on compensation (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. insurance company's defense (Para 5) |
| 4. principle of just compensation (Para 6) |
| 5. issues framed by the tribunal (Para 7) |
| 6. insurance company liability (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 7. court's final order (Para 18) |
ORDER :
2. Brief facts of the case are as under:
3. Learned advocate for the appellants - claimants has submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in not properly calculating the amount of compensation. He has submitted that amount of award is on lower side as the Tribunal has not properly considered the various aspects; like prospective income of the deceased, negligence, liability and family circumstances, etc. He has submitted that the learned Tribunal has erred in exonerating respondent No.3 Insurance Company from paying compensation and holding that only respondent Nos.1 and 2 are liable to pay the compensation. He has submitted that the learned Tribunal has erred in deducting 1/3rd of the considered income towards personal expenses of the deceased. He has further submitted that the learned Tribunal has assumed the incom
The court emphasized the principle of just compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, mandating that insurance companies remain liable even if the policy is in the name of a deceased owner, provided ....
The court affirmed that the insurance company is liable for compensation when the driver, even if related to the owner, was covered under the policy, emphasizing the principle of just compensation.
The court emphasized the importance of calculating compensation based on gross salary, considering future prospects and directed insurance companies to deposit compensation first despite policy breac....
The insurance company remains liable for compensation claims even after the death of the insured, as per Section 155 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, provided the claim arises from an event covered u....
The court ruled that the insurance company was not liable due to a fabricated policy, and compensation was adjusted based on the deceased's income and dependents.
The court affirmed the validity of awarding compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, adjusting income and future prospects, while rejecting insurer's claims of contributory negligence and liability....
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
