Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The present PIL was filed by the petitioner based on two news reports, had there been some due diligence exercised and research done on the part of the petitioner, it would have been apparent that the issues raised by the petitioner in the instant PIL had already been addressed through relevant statutes, rules and notifications.
The claimant was a passenger travelling in the truck, but the claimant did not state about any of his loaded goods in the statement or having taken the truck on hire
“The very purpose of adopting the multiplier method in Sarla Verma (supra) is to do away with the considerable variation and inconsistency in assessing compensation and also to bring uniformity and consistency.”
Kerala High Court said that petitioners have to abandon two-wheeler ride if they were suffering from any illness which disables them from wearing helmets.
Rajasthan High Court: A Division Bench of Manindra Mohan Srivastava, CJ and Madan Gopal Vyas, J., dismissed the petition and directed the
Karnataka High Court: A Division Bench of S.G Pandit and Anant Ramanath Hegde, JJ. allowed the appeal and modified the impugned order
Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: The Division Bench comprising of Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Mohan Lal, JJ., directed the Union
Supreme Court: The Division Bench of S. Abdul Nazeer* and Krishna Murari, JJ., held that neither the percentage of deduction for personal
Jharkhand High Court: Ananda Sen, J., dismissed and held that the amount which has been awarded by the Tribunal with the interest
Kerala High Court: C.S. Dias, J., held that a married daughter and parents of the deceased woman are legal representative under the
Orissa High Court: Biswanath Rath, J. dismissed both appeals being devoid of merits. The facts of the case are such that the
Karnataka High Court: A Division Bench of S. Sujatha and Sachin Shankar Magadum JJ., allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned
Chattisgarh High Court: A Division Bench of P. R. Ramchandra Menon and Parth Prateem Sahu JJ., allowed the appeal partly and modified
Allahabad High Court: Dr Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J., while addressing the matter observed that: “…where there are multiple claims, MACT should place all
The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways has issued the Motor Vehicle Aggregator Guidelines, 2020 as per the requirements and provisions of
Allahabad High Court: The Division Bench of Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Dr Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, JJ., while addressing the matter with regard
Karnataka High Court: A Division Bench of Alok Aradhe and H.T. Narendra Prasad JJ., allowed the appeal stating that the Tribunal is
Bombay High Court: V.L. Achliya, J., while addressing the issue with regard to the interest on compensation awarded in a motor accident case,
Bombay High Court: M.G. Giratkar, J., allowed an appeal filed against the order of the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal (“MACT”) whereby the appellants-claimants
Punjab and Haryana High Court: This appeal was filed before a Single Judge Bench of Lisa Gill, J., by the Insurance Company