Back
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA, J
J. RAJESWARI, J. MALLESWARI, J. PADMAVATHI, J. HYMAVATHI, J. PUSHPAVATHI, J. LAKSHMAMMA – Appellant
Versus
R. GURUVAMMAL, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. compensation adequacy and dependency loss (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments regarding review necessity and legal precedents (Para 7) |
| 3. court's observations on evidence and review powers (Para 9 , 12) |
| 4. legal reasoning on compensation adjustments (Para 10) |
COMMON ORDER:
Introductory:
1. Claimants in O.P.No.934 of 2003 filed appeal in M.A.C.M.A.No.4049 of 2014 questioning the adequacy of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Nellore (for short “the learned MACT”) under the Judgment dated 03.04.2006.
2. Claim made for Rs.15,00,000/- was partly allowed by the learned MACT and awarding a compensation of Rs.2,10,000/- in all with interest at 7.5% per annum.
3. Claimants are wife, daughters and mother of one Jadapalli Muni Ramayya (for short “the deceased”) who was working as the driver working in Irrigation Department.
4. After considering the rival contentions discarding Ex.A6 Salary Certificate relied for want of examining its author, the learned MACT adopted notional income at Rs.1,500/- per month and after deduction taken Rs.1,000/- per month as contribution and accepted Rs.12,000/- as multiplicand and applied the mul
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
