TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court decision on Motor Vehicles Act compensation appeal: limits on deductions, interest rate upheld, impleading errors noted.</h1> <h3>FAKEERAPPA AND ANR. Versus KARNATAKA CEMENT PIPE FACTORY AND ORS.</h3> The High Court dismissed an appeal seeking increased compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the death of a deceased. The Court restricted ... - Issues Involved: The issues involved in the judgment are the determination of compensation u/s Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the validity of the deduction for personal expenses and interest rate awarded.Compensation Determination: The appellant, as the parent of the deceased, filed a claim petition for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Tribunal calculated the compensation based on the deceased's age, monthly income, and loss of dependency, awarding a total sum with interest. An appeal was made seeking an increase in compensation, which was dismissed by the High Court.Validity of Deductions and Interest Rate: The appellants raised two points for adjudication - the justification of deducting half of the monthly income for personal expenses and the validity of the 6% interest rate awarded. The respondent argued that the deduction percentage should vary case by case and that the interest rate was not challenged before the High Court.Court's Decision: The Court noted discrepancies in the ages of the deceased's parents as claimed in the petition. It decided to restrict the deduction for personal expenses to one-third of the monthly income, considering the deceased's status as a bachelor. The Court found the multiplier slightly high but upheld it as there was no challenge by the insurer. The Court declined to interfere with the interest rate as it was not contested before the High Court.Additional Observation: The Court highlighted an error in impleading unrelated parties in the Claim Petition, emphasizing the need for responsible legal representation and proper consideration when involving parties in legal proceedings.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
