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

2021 Supreme(Jhk) 430

ANANDA SEN
Raghunath Sao – Appellant
Versus
Balbir Kuer – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Prashant Kr. Rahul, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Alok Lal, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. In this appeal, the appellants have prayed for enhancement of quantum of compensation, awarded in M.V. Claim Case No. 10/2011 by the District Judge-II-cum-MACT (Tribunal), Latehar vide order dated 24th January, 2018, whereby, an amount of Rs.3,04,000/-has been awarded as compensation.

3. Counsel for the appellant submits that while assessing the compensation, the income of the deceased was considered to be Rs.3,000/- per month, which is notional income, though the claimants have led their evidences that the deceased was a motorcycle mechanic and was earning Rs.4,000/- per month. He submits that the respondent have not disputed the fact that the deceased was a motor mechanic and income of the deceased have not been controverted. He further submits that in terms of the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, the claimants are entitled for enhancement of compensation on account of future prospect. He su

    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