Search Results for "Amputation"

154 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 154 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Partly Allows Appeal by Kadamba Transport Corporation in Motor Accident Claim — Reduces Compensation for Amputation of Thumb. Claimant's Income Assessed at Rs. 3,000 per Month Instead of Rs. 5,000, Multiplier Reduced from 16 to 11 Based on Age.

The case arises from a motor accident claim filed by Santosh Anant Naik (respondent no.1/claimant) against Kadamba Transport Corporation Ltd. (appella...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Gujarat High Court Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim for Amputation — Enhances Compensation with Future Prospects and Increased Pain & Suffering. Notional Income of Cleaner Assessed at Rs. 3,500 per Month with 40% Future Prospects Under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The appellant, Jitendrabhai Rajendrabhai Yadav, was a cleaner in an Eicher Tempo when on 05.06.2007, a collision between two tempos on the Ahmedabad-M...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Gujarat Enhances Compensation for Truck Cleaner in Motor Accident Claim — Right Leg Amputation Below Knee. Court applies multiplier of 16 for age 35, adds 40% future prospects, and awards Rs. 50,000 for loss of marriage prospects under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The appellant, Premsing @ Pappu Mansing Bhil (Damor), was a truck cleaner aged 35 years. On 16.11.2007, while crossing the road to have his meal, he w...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Gujarat High Court Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Claim Due to Inadequate Disability Assessment. Permanent Disability of 40% to Whole Body Considered for Loss of Future Income with 40% Future Prospects.

The appellant, Hiralal @ Hirabhai Ukabhai Makawana, was the original claimant in a motor accident claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Trib...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Court Reverses Railway Claims Tribunal Decision, Awards Rs. 8 Lakhs in Compensation for Untoward Incident. The appellant, mistakenly boarding the wrong train and sustaining injuries, was deemed a bona fide passenger eligible for compensation under the Railways Act, 1989.

This appeal, filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, challenges the judgment of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, wh...