Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Company Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Pankaj Kumar son of Tarkeshwar Prasad Agarwal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Insurance Company is in appeal against the judgment and award of compensation in Compensation Case No.187 of 2010 whereby and whereunder a compensation of Rs.5,05,530/- was awarded in favour of the claimant under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act.
2. The appeal is mainly on the ground that the vehicle was being driven by the driver- Mahesh Munda, who was not having valid driving license at the time of accident, as neither driving license was produced before the Tribunal nor details thereof was given in the claim application.
3. In order to clear the mist of doubt regarding validity of driving license, a report was called for vide order dated 29.11.2022 from D.T.O., Ranchi which has been received vide letter no.636 dated 20.03.2025, wherein it has been stated that Mahesh Munda had a valid driving license to drive LMV from 04.01.2006 and HGV from 07.06.2008 and license renewal validity was from 02.02.2009 to 01.02.2012.
4. In the present case, there is no dispute whatsoever that accident took place on 30th November, 2009 and therefore, the plea that driver was not having valid driving license, has no legs to stand.
Misc. Appeal No.505 of 2015 file
The determination of compensation in personal injury cases must consider notional income and its impact on future earning capacity, especially in cases of permanent disability resulting from the acci....
Court held that absence of documentary evidence for income necessitates using notional income, whereas the insurer's liability persists despite challenges to the driver's license.
The court emphasized just compensation principles in accident claims, modifying awards based on notional income and established precedents to ensure fairness to the claimants.
The court clarified the need for functional disability assessment in determining compensation, asserting that future earnings loss should reflect realistic income capabilities post-injury.
It is a matter of record that Tribunal considered permanent disability of the body as a whole to extent of 90% and assessed compensation under head of loss of future income
The court ruled that income tax returns are essential for determining compensation, and notional income must reflect actual earnings.
Compensation for injuries must be based on actual loss of income and the impact of disability on earning capacity, not on arbitrary assessments.
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
