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

2006 Supreme(Raj) 2047

SHIV KUMAR SHARMA
BHANWAR LAL – Appellant
Versus
DEVAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Jagdish Singh Chauhan, N.S.Dhakad, U.P.Gaur

Judgment

( 1 ) HEARD rival submissions.

( 2 ) THE claimant-appellants being dissatisfied with the size of the award have preferred the instant appeal. Learned Motor accident Claims Tribunal, Baran awarded the compensation in the sum of Rs. 58,000 to claimant-appellants vide award dated July 17, 2003 in relation to the incident occurred on May 24, 2002 that took life of Kapil aged 7 years.

( 3 ) IT is contended by learned Counsel for the appellants that as per Second Schedule appended to Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 the multiplier of 15 would have been to be applied.

( 4 ) IN Manju Devi v. Musafir Paswan, Their lordships of the Supreme Court indicated in para 3 thus:

" As set out in the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for a boy of 13 years of age, a multiplier of 15 would have to be applied. As per the second Schedule, he being a non-earning person, a sum of Rs. 15,000 must be taken as the income. Thus, the compensation comes to Rs. 2,25,000.

( 5 ) IT is well settled that there should be no departure from the multiplier method on the ground that payment being made is just compensation. It has been held by the Apex court that the multiplier method must be accepted metho


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