Just a moment...

Top
Help
Upgrade to AI Search

We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:

1. Basic
Quick overview summary answering your query with referencesCategory-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI

2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
Detailed report covering:
     -   Overview Summary
     -   Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
     -   Relevant Case Laws
     -   Tariff / Classification / HSN
     -   Expert views from TaxTMI
     -   Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy

• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:

Explore AI Search

Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2001 (8) TMI 1444 - SC - Indian Laws

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Supreme Court awards compensation for fire victims in TISCO case The Supreme Court appointed Shri Y.V. Chandrachud to determine compensation for victims of a devastating fire caused by alleged negligence of Tata Iron ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Supreme Court awards compensation for fire victims in TISCO case

                            The Supreme Court appointed Shri Y.V. Chandrachud to determine compensation for victims of a devastating fire caused by alleged negligence of Tata Iron and Steel Company officers. Shri Y.V. Chandrachud awarded Rs. 1,19,58,320/- for the deceased and Rs. 288 lakh as interim compensation for the injured. The court enhanced compensation figures for housewives and children, and directed TISCO to deposit the amounts within three months for disbursement to claimants. The court commended the efforts of Shri Y.V. Chandrachud and the counsel, concluding the case with appreciation for TISCO's non-adversarial approach and counsel's assistance.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Prosecution of Tata Iron and Steel Company officers for negligence.
                            2. Compensation to victims by the State Government and the Company.
                            3. Security and safety for the victims' families.
                            4. Provision of legal assistance to victims.
                            5. Determination of compensation by Shri Y.V. Chandrachud.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Prosecution of Tata Iron and Steel Company Officers for Negligence:
                            The petitioners alleged negligence by Tata Iron and Steel Company (TISCO) in organizing the event on March 3, 1989, which led to a devastating fire resulting in 60 deaths and 113 injuries. The State of Bihar was accused of colluding with TISCO and failing to take action against the negligent officers. The State denied these allegations, stating that inquiries were conducted, and criminal prosecutions were launched based on the findings.

                            2. Compensation to Victims by the State Government and the Company:
                            The petitioners sought compensation for the victims from both the State Government and TISCO. TISCO, while denying negligence, agreed to let the court determine the monetary compensation. The Supreme Court referred the matter to Shri Y.V. Chandrachud to determine the compensation, applying principles from specific Andhra Pradesh High Court decisions.

                            3. Security and Safety for the Victims' Families:
                            The petitioners requested security and safety for the victims' families, fearing harassment by TISCO. This issue was acknowledged but not elaborated upon in the judgment.

                            4. Provision of Legal Assistance to Victims:
                            The petitioners also sought legal assistance for the victims to pursue cases in criminal and civil courts. This request was noted but not detailed in the judgment.

                            5. Determination of Compensation by Shri Y.V. Chandrachud:
                            Shri Y.V. Chandrachud was tasked with determining the compensation for the deceased and injured. He applied the multiplier method, a well-established method for assessing future losses, and considered various factors such as age, income, and dependency. The compensation for housewives was based on the value of services rendered, while for children, it was determined based on age and potential future contribution.

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            Prosecution and Negligence:
                            The petitioners accused TISCO of gross negligence in organizing the event, violating safety measures, and the Factories Act. The State was alleged to have colluded with TISCO, showing inaction. The State countered these claims, stating inquiries were conducted and prosecutions launched.

                            Compensation Determination:
                            The Supreme Court appointed Shri Y.V. Chandrachud to determine compensation, who used the multiplier method, commonly applied in motor vehicle accident cases. He considered various factors, including the deceased's age, income, and dependency. For housewives, he estimated the value of their services at Rs. 12,000 to Rs. 36,000 per annum, depending on age, and applied appropriate multipliers. For children, a uniform sum was initially fixed, which the court later enhanced.

                            Security and Legal Assistance:
                            The petitioners' request for security and legal assistance was noted but not detailed in the judgment.

                            Final Compensation:
                            Shri Y.V. Chandrachud awarded Rs. 1,19,58,320/- for the deceased and Rs. 288 lakh as interim compensation for the injured. The Supreme Court enhanced the conventional figure added to the compensation from Rs. 25,000 to Rs. 50,000. For housewives, the value of services was increased to Rs. 36,000 per annum for those aged 34-59 and Rs. 20,000 for those aged 62-72. For children, the compensation was tripled for those aged 5-10 and significantly increased for those aged 10-15.

                            Injured Persons:
                            Compensation for injured persons was determined based on the extent of burn injuries, ranging from Rs. 3 lakh to Rs. 10 lakh for girls and Rs. 3 lakh to Rs. 5 lakh for boys. The court awarded a lump sum of Rs. 2 lakhs for those with burn injuries of 10% and below.

                            Conclusion:
                            The Supreme Court expressed gratitude to Shri Y.V. Chandrachud for his efforts and acknowledged the valuable services of the counsel involved. The petition was disposed of with directions for TISCO to deposit the enhanced compensation amounts within three months. The compensation was to be disbursed to the claimants via account payee cheques or bank drafts. The court appreciated the non-adversarial stance taken by TISCO and the assistance provided by the counsel.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found