<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1977 (2) TMI 132 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200371</link>
    <description>Motor accident compensation pleadings are construed liberally, so a loosely framed claim will still sustain joint and several liability where the facts establish rash and negligent driving. The decision also confirms that fatal accident compensation must reflect realistic pecuniary loss, including probable future earnings, progression to the top of the pay scale, and pensionary and gratuity benefits. An award that ignores those components is inadequate and may be enhanced to secure just compensation for dependants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Feb 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2018 11:23:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=514837" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1977 (2) TMI 132 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200371</link>
      <description>Motor accident compensation pleadings are construed liberally, so a loosely framed claim will still sustain joint and several liability where the facts establish rash and negligent driving. The decision also confirms that fatal accident compensation must reflect realistic pecuniary loss, including probable future earnings, progression to the top of the pay scale, and pensionary and gratuity benefits. An award that ignores those components is inadequate and may be enhanced to secure just compensation for dependants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Feb 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200371</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>