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

2023 Supreme(All) 2188

JASPREET SINGH
Arjun Singh – Appellant
Versus
Siyaram – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant : Hakeel Ahmad Ansari,Mukesh Singh.
For the Respondent: Dinesh Kumar,Govind Prasad Tripathi,Santosh Kr. Rai.

JUDGMENT

Jaspreet Singh, J.

The instant appeal has been filed by the claimants under Section 173 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT assailing the award dated 06.01.2012 whereby in C.P. No.162 of 2010, in a death case, the Tribunal awarded a sum of 2,62,000/- alongwith 6% interest per annum which was payable by the Insurance Company.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants has primarily submitted that the Tribunal erred in adopting the multiplier on the basis of the age of the father of the deceased rather the multiplier should have been on the age of the deceased. It is further urged that neither any amount has been awarded towards future prospects nor the appropriate amount has been granted under the conventional heads.

3. It is further submitted that it was stated that the deceased was engaged in the business of selling milk and was able to earn 6000/- per month but the Tribunal has erred in taking the income of the deceased as 2500/- which was completely incorrect. It is thus urged that for the aforesaid reason, the appellants are entitled to an enhanced sum as to be determined by this Court.

4. Shri. Dinesh Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent no.3 submits that the Tribunal consideri

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