Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Sat Bhushan Kapoor – Appellant
Versus
Ram Kumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sudeepti Sharma, J.
The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 1.6.2007 passed in the claim petition filed under Sections 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panipat (for short, 'the Tribunal') for enhancement of compensation granted to the appellants/claimants, who are the family members of the deceased.
FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE
2. The brief facts of the case as mentioned in the claim petition are that on 9.11.2004, Sushil Kumar (since deceased) alongwith two other boys namely Vikas and Ashok Kumar was riding a motor-cycle for returning to Panipat from Karnal. Vikas was driving the motorcycle. Remaining two boys were pillion riders. At about 11.00 p.m. when they reached near Yamuna Enclave, Panipat, a truck bearing registration No. HR-69-1848 driven by Bijender-respondent No.2, at a very high speed in a rash and negligent manner came from the backside and hit the motorcycle from behind. All the three riders on the motorcycle fell down on the road and sustained multiple Injuries. Sushil and Vikas received fatal injuries and died on the spot. Ashok Kumar was taken to Civil Hospital, Panipat.
3. Upon notice of the c
The judgment clarifies compensation adjustments due to insufficient assessment of income and deductions under motor vehicle accident claims.
Compensation for motor vehicle accidents must consider full taxable income, including allowances and future prospects, with appropriate deductions for living expenses based on dependents.
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
