Madhya Pradesh Court July 2005 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Dhapu Bai and ors. Vs. Antar Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC580; 2006ACJ2556
R.V. Raveendran, C.J. and A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award, dated 6.7.2001, passed by the learned Additional Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Manawar, District Dhar in Claim Case No. 37 of 1999. By impunged award, the learned Member of Claims Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition filed by the claimants. Facts in brief that led to filing of claim petition out of which this appeal arises need to be mentioned in brief infra.2. On 15.6.1998, Narsingh, aged about 40 years, was returning to his house. It is at that time, the truck bearing No. MP 09-KA 4212 which was owned by the respondent No. 1 and driven by the respondent No. 2 came from rear and dashed to Narsingh. The impact of the vehicle was so violent that Narsingh succumbed to injuries on the spot. It is this event, i.e., death of Narsingh, which gave rise to filing of the claim petition out of which this appeal arises claiming compensati...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Virendra Singh (Deceased) Through L.R ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC369; 2006ACJ2343
R.V. Raveendran, C.J. and A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the insurance company (NA-3) under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against an award dated 20.10.2000, passed by the learned Second Additional Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Indore in Claim Case No. 378 of 1997.2. In this appeal, the appellant, i.e., the insurance company has questioned the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Member of Claims Tribunal to the claimant Virendra Singh, respondent No. 1, who expired pending this appeal and now represented by his legal representatives, the respondent Nos. 1 (i) to (iv) amounting to Rs. 7,47,630 for the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident that occurred on 28.5.1997.3. So the only question that arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether Claims Tribunal was justified on facts in determining compensation amounting to Rs. 7,47,630 to an injured, i.e., Virendra Singh who met with a car accident that occurred on 28.5.1997. As observed sup...
Dr. Pramodchandra and ors. Vs. Ashwani Arora and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-2005
Reported in: II(2006)ACC242; 2007ACJ959
R.V. Raveendran, C.J.1. As these two appeals arise from the same judgment - one by the claimants (M.A. No. 947 of 2001) and other by the insurance company (M.A. No. 912 of 2001), they are heard together by consent and disposed of by this common judgment. As the ranks of the parties in the two appeals differ, the parties will be referred to by their ranks in the claim petitions.2. The claimants are the husband and two minor children of one Dr. Shobha Shukla, who died in a motor accident on 20.3.1999 caused on account of negligence of the driver of truck bearing No. MP 09-D 7008 (of which respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are respectively the owner driver and insurer). Deceased was 39 years old and was working as Assistant Professor in Chemistry in Government Post Graduate College, Mhow. She was a postgraduate in science and held a doctorate in chemistry. Her basic pay at the time of death was Rs. 10,475 and with allowances, her total salary was Rs. 13,827. The claimants filed the Claim Case No...
Narsingh and ors. Vs. Suroo @ Surapsingh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-01-2005
Reported in: 3(2005)ACC891
ORDERN.K. Modi, J.1. Being aggrieved by the inadequate amount of the award Rs. 1,08,400/-, the present appeal has been filed.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the deceased was of the age of 21 years. The income of the deceased was @ Rs. 60/- per day. It is submitted that the multiplier of 13 has been applied while multiplier of 17 ought to have been applied. Similarly the income of the deceased has been assessed on the basis that the deceased was working 20 days in a month and was earning Rs. 1,000/-per month as held by the Tribunal.3. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that even in case of person who was not working notional income has been assessed as Rs. 15,000/- per year. After examining the record it is found that income of the deceased has been assessed as Rs. 10,000/- per year and after deducting the dependency the income of the deceased has been assessed @ Rs. 7,800/- per year. After applying the multiplier of 13, which comes to Rs. 1,01,400/- has been al...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›