ACCIDENT
Involvement of vehicle—Evidence—Hostile witness—Appreciation of evidence—Tribunal found that offending trailer was involved in the accident and awarded compensation—High Court set aside the award holding that witness who implicated offending trailer turned hostile in criminal case—Whether High Court was justified in reversing the findings of Tribunal on involvement of offending trailer merely because witness turned hostile in criminal ... Read more.

MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988
Section 149 (2) (a) (ii)—Motor insurance—Driving licence—Liability of insurance company—Pay and recover order—Whether pay and recover principle is applicable when driver of offending vehicle does not possess a valid driving licence—Held: yes. [2025 ACJ 2506 (SC) followed]. ... Read more.

MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988
Section 166 (5) [as inserted w.e.f. 1.4.2022]—Claim application—Abatement—Death of injured-claimant during pendency of appeal seeking enhancement—Substitution of legal representatives—Insurance company contended that claim abates on death of injured-claimant and legal representatives cannot continue proceedings in view of section 306, Succession Act, 1925—Held: section 166 (5) provides that right to claim compensation ... Read more.

NEGLIGENCE
Contributory negligence—Pillion rider—Accident between two motor cycles resulting in injuries to pillion rider on one of the motor cycles—Tribunal and High Court attributed 50 per cent contributory negligence to pillion rider on the ground that both motor cycles were on the wrong side and both motorcyclists were equally negligent—Held: negligence of pillion rider cannot be inferred vicariously from the conduct of motorcyclist; at best the case ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Fatal accident—Deceased a boy aged 9—Claimants: mother and three siblings—Death of father in the same accident—High Court assessed income based on Second Schedule to Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and awarded Rs. 3,50,000—Apex Court held that Second Schedule is inappropriate for assessing income and fixed income at Rs. 6,390 p.m. as per minimum wages of a skilled worker during 2013, added 40 per cent of income towards future prospects, deducted ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Fatal accident—Deceased a bachelor aged 22, final year Engineering student with campus placement offer of Rs. 25,000 p.m. and earning Rs. 4,500 p.m. as a computer operator—Claimants: parents—Tribunal assessed income at Rs. 4,500 p.m., added 30 per cent towards future prospects, deducted 50 per cent for personal expenses and awarded Rs. 6,71,300—High Court affirmed Tribunal’s award—Apex Court relying on offer letter assessed income ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Fatal accident—Deceased a bachelor aged 26—Claimants: parents—Claims Tribunal took income at Rs. 17,677 p.m., adopted multiplier taking average of age of parents and awarded Rs. 17,46,000—High Court found that deceased was negligent to the extent of 50 per cent and reduced the compensation—Apex Court set aside finding of contributory negligence and held that adoption of multiplier based on the average of age of parents is erroneous—Apex ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Fatal accident—Deceased aged 35, restaurant owner, earning Rs. 10,000 p.m.—Claimants: three dependants—Tribunal in absence of documentary evidence took income at Rs. 5,000 p.m. and awarded Rs. 6,47,000—High Court affirmed assessment of income at Rs. 5,000 p.m., added 40 per cent towards future prospects and enhanced the award to Rs. 9,80,000—Apex Court relying on uncontroverted oral evidence of claimants found that deceased would have reasonably ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Fatal accident—Deceased aged 35, working in a stone crusher company, drawing Rs. 6,000 p.m. and earning Rs. 10,000 p.m. from farming—Claimants: widow, four minor children and parents—Tribunal awarded Rs. 7,28,500—High Court enhanced the award to Rs. 9,20,500—Apex Court assessed income at Rs. 8,000 p.m., deducted th for personal expenses, adopted multiplier of 16 and allowed Rs. 9,67,680 plus Rs. 2,80,000 for loss of consortium, Rs. 25,000 ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Fatal accident—Deceased earning Rs. 8,623 p.m.—Claimants: seven dependants—Tribunal awarded Rs. 7,32,400—High Court assessed income at Rs. 8,623 p.m., deducted Rs. 6,588 towards GPF and GIS and allowing Rs. 70,000 under conventional heads enhanced the award to Rs. 12,20,968—Apex Court disallowing deductions towards GPF and GIS fixed income at Rs. 8,623 p.m., added 30 per cent of income for future prospects, deducted th for personal expenses, ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Fatal accident—Principles of assessment—Income—Determination of—Deceased a final year Engineering student with campus placement offer of Rs. 25,000 p.m. and earning Rs. 4,500 p.m. as a computer operator—Tribunal assessed income at Rs. 4,500 p.m. which was affirmed by the High Court—Held: due importance and weightage needs to be given to the offer letter while determining income; income assessed at Rs. 25,000 p.m. as per campus placement ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Fatal accident—Principles of assessment—Income—Determination of—Deceased aged 35, running a restaurant—Tribunal and High Court assessed income at Rs. 5,000 p.m.—Claimants stated that deceased was earning Rs. 10,000 p.m.—No documentary evidence produced—Whether income can be assessed on the basis of oral evidence in absence of documentary evidence—Held: yes; while documentary evidence may not always be available, court ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Fatal accident—Principles of assessment—Income—Determination of—Deceased boy aged 9 met with fatal accident in 2013—Whether Tribunal and High Court were justified in assessing notional income based on Second Schedule to Motor Vehicles Act, 1988—Held: no; Second Schedule having been introduced in 1994 is disconnected from ground economic realities and should not be relied upon; income assessed at Rs. 6,390 p.m. as per prevailing minimum ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Fatal accident—Principles of assessment—Income—Determination of—Foreign employment—Deceased a bachelor aged 27, employed as a System Analyst in U.S.A., drawing USD 47,050 p.a. (Rs. 21,17,250 p.a.)—Claimants: parents, two brothers and a sister—Tribunal took income at Rs. 21,17,250 p.a., deducted 40 per cent for personal expenses, adopted multiplier of 5 and awarded Rs. 63,00,000—High Court took income at Rs. 7,00,000 p.a. ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Fatal accident—Principles of assessment—Income—Determination of—Income tax return—Deceased was engaged in transport business and agriculture—ITR filed during lifetime of the deceased shows income of Rs. 84,000 p.a. and ITR filed posthumously shows income of Rs. 1,26,000 p.a.—Tribunal and High Court rejected ITR filed posthumously holding that it was not proved and was not genuine as there were variations in signature and assessed ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Injury—Arm—Amputation of right arm below elbow—Injured aged 25, working as a labourer, getting Rs. 9,000 p.m., suffered permanent disability at 60 per cent—Tribunal fixed income at Rs. 60,000 p.a. and taking permanent disability at 20 per cent awarded Rs. 3,76,090—High Court assessed disability at 40 per cent and enhanced the award to Rs. 6,61,690—Apex Court relying on minimum wages of an unskilled worker fixed income at Rs. 6,850 ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Injury—Brain and leg—Injured a lady aged 24, suffered 85 per cent mental disability and 45 per cent disability to left leg—Claims Tribunal took income at Rs. 10,000 p.m. and awarded Rs. 30,24,800—High Court in absence of evidence fixed income at Rs. 9,000 p.m., added 40 per cent of income towards future prospects and enhanced the award to Rs. 35,86,400—Apex Court affirmed assessment of income at Rs. 9,000 p.m., added 40 per cent of income ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Injury—Head—Injured aged 36, agriculturist cultivating own land, engaged in vending milk and also working in a plywood shop, suffered head injury with blood clot in brain and blurry vision in left eye resulting in permanent disability at 40.70 per cent—Tribunal fixed income at Rs. 11,000 p.m. and taking functional disability at 15 per cent awarded Rs. 5,11,166—High Court assessed disability at 25 per cent and enhanced the award to Rs. 7,48,166—Apex ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Injury—Hemiparesis—Injured aged 34, a vegetable seller also doing tailoring work, suffered head injury resulting in left side hemiparesis and permanent disability at 55 per cent—Tribunal fixed income at Rs. 5,500 p.m. and taking functional disability at 30 per cent awarded Rs. 5,41,893—High Court affirmed Tribunal’s assessment of disability at 30 per cent, considering minimum wages of an unskilled worker during 2017 fixed income at Rs. 6,950 ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Injury—Injured aged 35, aluminium fabricator, earning Rs. 21,000 p.m.—No evidence about income—Doctor opined that injured suffered disability at 63 per cent, faces difficulty is sitting, squatting and climbing stairs and movement of his right (dominant) hand is reduced by 35 per cent—Tribunal fixed disability at 63 per cent and taking Rs. 2,000 per percentage of disability awarded Rs. 2,56,300—High Court took Rs. 3,000 per percentage of ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Injury—Leg—Amputation of right leg below knee—Injured aged 36, agriculturist, also engaged in milk vending and brick manufacturing, earning Rs. 5,60,000 p.a., sustained 55 per cent permanent disability—Tribunal in absence of credible evidence assessed income at Rs. 6,000 p.m. and awarded Rs. 3,79,075 after deducting 50 per cent for contributory negligence—High Court affirmed finding of contributory negligence, took income at Rs. 7,500 p.m. ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Injury—Principles of assessment—Future prospects—Tribunal awarded Rs. 12,93,000 and High Court taking income at Rs. 9,500 p.m. enhanced the compensation to Rs. 32,09,000 but failed to add future prospects while computing loss of future earnings—Whether addition of future prospects is mandatory—Held: yes; compensation enhanced from Rs. 32,09,000 to Rs. 39,84,200 by incorporating 40 per cent towards future prospects. ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Injury—Principles of assessment—Multiplier—Choice of—Injured aged 45 rendered 100 per cent disabled—Tribunal and High Court adopted multiplier of 14—Injured died 11 years after the accident during pendency of appeal before the Apex Court for enhancement and legal representatives were substituted—Whether multiplier of 14 can be applied when injured lived only for 11 years after the accident—Held: no; when consideration is ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Injury—Quadriplegia—Injured aged 23, folklore artist, earning Rs. 36,000 p.m., sustained spinal injury resulting in quadriplegia and permanent disability at 90 per cent—Tribunal fixed income at Rs. 10,000 p.m. and taking disability at 90 per cent awarded Rs. 29,68,200—High Court assessed income at Rs. 13,500 p.m. and taking functional disability at 100 per cent allowed Rs. 49,05,600—Apex Court in absence of evidence affirmed assessment of ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Injury—Thumb—Amputation of left thumb—Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 6,92,828 but High Court reduced compensation to Rs. 1,33,508—Apex Court held that loss of thumb in advanced stage of life is traumatic disability compromising day-to-day functions of the injured and enhanced the award to Rs. 2,50,000. ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Deductions—Pension—Family pension—Deceased a pensioner and there is no evidence of any independent source of income—Whether the amount of family pension is deductible while assessing income of the deceased whose source of income was only pension—Held: yes. ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Interest—Allowed at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date of filing of claim application till payment. ... Read more.

QUANTUM
Interest—Tribunal allowed interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date of filing of claim application which was reduced to 6 per cent per annum by the High Court—Apex Court enhanced the rate to 9 per cent per annum. ... Read more.

WORDS AND PHRASES
‘Bystander’ and ‘attendant’—Difference explained. ... Read more.

Section 166 (1) (c) read with Hindu Succession Act, 1956, section 15 (1) (b)—Claim application—Legal representative— Death of married daughter, her husband and minor son in the same accident—Claim filed by parents of married daughter and her mother-in-law was made a party respondent—Tribunal apportioned the award equally amongst mother, father and mother-in-law of the deceased—Whether mother-in-law of the deceased, being the only surviving class-II legal heir, ... Read more.