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

1999 Supreme(Raj) 848

D.C.DALELA
Bhagwan Singh Meena – Appellant
Versus
Jai Kishan Tiwari – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant:B.C. Rawat, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. - None has appeared for the respondents. Therefore, the arguments of the learned Counsel for the appellant have been heard.

2. This is an appeal for enhancement of the amount of compensation, awarded by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur. In this case, the appellant-claimant sustained severe and serious injuries on account of the accident. His right leg had to be amputated. The learned Tribunal has awarded Rs. 20,000 as pecuniary damages and Rs. 1,30,000 as non-pecuniary damages. Thus, a total compensation of Rs. 1,50,000 has been awarded. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of R.D. Hattangadi v. Pest Control (India) Pvt. Ltd., 1995 ACJ 366 (SC) , has laid down as under:

"Broadly speaking, while fixing an amount of compensation payable to a victim of an accident, the damages have to be assessed separately as pecuniary damages and special damages. Pecuniary damages are those which the victim has actually incurred and which are capable of being calculated in terms of money; whereas non-pecuniary damages are those which are incapable of being assessed by arithmetical calculations. In order to appreciate two concepts, pecuniary damages may include expenses inc



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