Judgments - Compensation Enhanced
HAMDARD LABORATORIES Vs. HARYANA STATE INDUSTRIAL AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND ORS.
GOLLA RAJANNA ETC. ETC. Vs. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER AND ANR ETC ETC.
The Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, having regard to the evidence, had returned a finding on the nature of injury and the percentage of disability. It is purely a question of fact. There is no case for the insurance company that the finding is based on no evidence at all or that it is perverse. Under Section 4(1)(c)(ii) of the Act, Full Judgment
SANDHYA RANI DEBBARMA & ORS Vs. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD & ANR
MITHUSINH PANNASINH CHAUHAN Vs. GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORP. & ANR
V. KRISHNAKUMAR Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU &ORS.
An application of this principle is that the aggrieved person should get that sum of money, which would put him in the same position if he had not sustained the wrong. It must necessarily result in compensating the aggrieved person for the financial loss suffered due to the event, the pain and suffering undergone and the liability that he/she would have to incur due to Full Judgment
Bharat Lal Dewangan & Anr. Vs Kamal Kumar Verma & Ors.
ASHA VERMAN & ORS. Vs. MAHARAJ SINGH & ORS.
On applying the principles as laid down in the case of Sarla Verma (supra), 50% of the salary must be added to the income of the deceased towards future prospects of income, which comes to Rs.6,900/- per month, i.e. Rs.82,800/- per annum. Deducting 1/4th for personal expenses and applying the appropriate multiplier taking into consideration the age of Full Judgment
SURTI GUPTA Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. & ANR.
It has also been observed by the High Court for the purpose of calculation of future loss of dependency of the appellant that the deceased at the time of the accident on 10.7.1990 was drawing a salary of Rs.4,214/- per month and was 45 years of age. However, we are of the view that the salary of the deceased at the time of her death taken by the High Court Full Judgment
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. RAM PAL
Only question raised for consideration is whether the sentence imposed in the facts and circumstances is fair and just. Moreover, in an appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution, this Court does not re-appreciate the evidence, in absence of perversity or patent legal error, merely because a different view was also possible. We are thus, not inclined to reopen Full Judgment
JITENDRA KHIMSHANKAR TRIVEDI & ORS. Vs. KASAM DAUD KUMBHAR & ORS.
Even assuming Jayvantiben Jitendra Trivedi was not self- employed doing embroidery and tailoring work, the fact remains that she was a housewife and a home maker. It is hard to monetize the domestic work done by a house-mother. The services of the mother/wife is available 24 hours and her duties are never fixed. Courts have Full Judgment
- 1
- 2
- Next
- Last