{"id":220963,"date":"2019-10-17T17:00:08","date_gmt":"2019-10-17T11:30:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=220963"},"modified":"2019-10-17T16:19:17","modified_gmt":"2019-10-17T10:49:17","slug":"all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/17\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\/","title":{"rendered":"All HC | Compensation determined by MACT held insufficient; multiplier of 15 applied"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Allahabad High Court:<\/strong>\u00a0Rajnish Kumar, J. while allowing the instant appeal ordered for enhanced compensation to the appellant\/claimant.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In the instant case, the appellant\/claimant filed a claim petition after his son died in a motor accident.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal\/Additional District Judge allowed the above claim petition and awarded Rs 55,000 as compensation along with interest at the rate of 8% per annum, out of which Rs 27,500 for the appellant\/claimant and Rs 27,500 to his wife, i.e., the mother of the deceased.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Aggrieved by the compensation, this instant first appeal was filed.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Counsel for the appellant, M. Saeed submitted that the deceased was young and studied in Class VIII l. He was a bright student. There are six dependants in the family. If he would have been alive, he would have earned a lot and helped the appellant in maintaining all. But, the Tribunal wrongly and illegally assessed the notional income of the deceased as Rs 15,000 which should have been higher in view of <em>Kishan Gopal v. Lala,<\/em> <a href=\"http:\/\/scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/83x4lG03\">(2014) 1 SCC 244<\/a>. He further submitted that the multiplier of 5 should have been applied to the age of the father, instead, it should be applied to the age of the deceased. Lesser amount was awarded towards conventional heads, namely loss of estate, loss of consortium and loss of funeral expenses, which are also liable to be enhanced.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">He also relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court i.e., <em>Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan,<\/em> <a href=\"http:\/\/scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/6DM11bj9\">(2013) 9 SCC 65<\/a> by which a multiplier of 15 is liable to be applied in the present case.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Counsel for the respondent, R.C. Sharma submitted that the deceased was aged about 14 years, as such, he was minor at the time of death. Therefore, the notional income of Rs 15,000 has rightly been assessed and the multiplier has rightly been applied to the age of the father. Moreover, relied on two cases i.e., <em>Khalil Ahmad v. Jitendra Bhushen Pandey,<\/em> F.A.F.O. No.377 of 2001 and <em>Om Prakash Verma v. Krishna Goel<\/em>, F.A.F.O. No.285 of 2009 and submitted that the appellant is entitled only for a fixed compensation of Rs 1,50,000.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">After analyzing the facts and submissions of the parties, the Court observed that the notional income of Rs 15,000 was assessed by the Tribunal as no evidence was adduced as to the income of the deceased. The case of <em>Kishan Gopal<\/em> was not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case because in that case the deceased was assisting the appellants in their agricultural occupation. While citing two judgments of the Supreme Court &#8211; <em>National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi<\/em>, <a href=\"http:\/\/scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/kS74F1My\">(2017) 16 SCC 680<\/a><strong>,<\/strong> in paragraph 59.7 and <em>Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mandala Yadagiri Goud,<\/em> <a href=\"http:\/\/scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/bV23VIZc\">(2019) 5 SCC 554<\/a>, the Court came to a conclusion that the multiplier should be applied on the age of the deceased.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">But, observed one factor that in the case of<em> Sarla<\/em> <em>Verma v. DTC<\/em>, <a href=\"http:\/\/scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/3DmgYT9k\">(2009) 6 SCC 121<\/a>, the multiplier was provided from the age of 15. The Supreme Court in <em>Reshma Kumar<\/em> held that in cases where the age of the deceased is up to 15 years, irrespective of Section 166 or Section 163-A under which the claim for compensation has been made, a multiplier of 15 should be followed.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In view of the above, this Court held that a multiplier of 15 should be applied in the present case in place of 5. Furthermore, the court held that the appellants are entitled to Rs 15,000, Rs 40,000 and Rs 15,000 under the conventional heads in view of <em>National Insurance Company<\/em> in place of Rs 2000 and Rs 3,000. [Gaya Prasad v. K. Trivedi, <a href=\"http:\/\/scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/62QBkL01\"><b>2019 SCC OnLine All 3670<\/b><\/a>, decided on 01-10-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Allahabad High Court:\u00a0Rajnish Kumar, J. while allowing the instant appeal ordered for enhanced compensation to the appellant\/claimant. In the instant case, the <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2728,11661],"class_list":["post-220963","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-compensation","tag-motor-accident-claims-tribunal"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.4 (Yoast SEO v27.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>All HC | Compensation determined by MACT held insufficient; multiplier of 15 applied | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/17\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"All HC | Compensation determined by MACT held insufficient; multiplier of 15 applied\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Allahabad High Court:\u00a0Rajnish Kumar, J. while allowing the instant appeal ordered for enhanced compensation to the appellant\/claimant. In the instant case, the\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/17\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-10-17T11:30:08+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/Allahabad-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/10\\\/17\\\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/10\\\/17\\\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"headline\":\"All HC | Compensation determined by MACT held insufficient; multiplier of 15 applied\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-10-17T11:30:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/10\\\/17\\\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":605,\"commentCount\":0,\"keywords\":[\"compensation\",\"Motor Accident Claims Tribunal\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"High Courts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/10\\\/17\\\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/10\\\/17\\\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/10\\\/17\\\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\\\/\",\"name\":\"All HC | Compensation determined by MACT held insufficient; multiplier of 15 applied | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2019-10-17T11:30:08+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/10\\\/17\\\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/10\\\/17\\\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/10\\\/17\\\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"All HC | Compensation determined by MACT held insufficient; multiplier of 15 applied\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2021\\\/04\\\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2021\\\/04\\\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2021\\\/04\\\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_1\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"All HC | Compensation determined by MACT held insufficient; multiplier of 15 applied | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/17\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"All HC | Compensation determined by MACT held insufficient; multiplier of 15 applied","og_description":"Allahabad High Court:\u00a0Rajnish Kumar, J. while allowing the instant appeal ordered for enhanced compensation to the appellant\/claimant. In the instant case, the","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/17\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-10-17T11:30:08+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/Allahabad-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/17\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/17\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\/"},"author":{"name":"Bhumika Indulia","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"headline":"All HC | Compensation determined by MACT held insufficient; multiplier of 15 applied","datePublished":"2019-10-17T11:30:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/17\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\/"},"wordCount":605,"commentCount":0,"keywords":["compensation","Motor Accident Claims Tribunal"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","High Courts"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/17\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/17\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/17\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\/","name":"All HC | Compensation determined by MACT held insufficient; multiplier of 15 applied | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2019-10-17T11:30:08+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/17\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/17\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/17\/all-hc-compensation-determined-by-mact-held-insufficient-multiplier-of-15-applied\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"All HC | Compensation determined by MACT held insufficient; multiplier of 15 applied"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":220606,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/09\/pat-hc-insurance-company-granted-the-right-to-recover-half-of-compensation-amount-from-the-owner-insurer-of-the-other-vehicle-involved-in-an-accident-caused-due-to-composite-negligence\/","url_meta":{"origin":220963,"position":0},"title":"Pat HC | Insurance Company granted right to recover half of compensation amount from owner\/ insurer of other vehicle involved in an accident caused due to composite negligence","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 9, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Patna High Court: S. Kumar, J. dismissed the appeal filed by the insurance company on the grounds that the parties were liable severally as well as jointly. Although the company had the right to recover such compensation paid from the other party involved in the accident for which insurance was\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":302686,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/09\/30\/enhancement-of-compensation-in-motor-accident-claims-case-due-to-wrong-multiplier-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":220963,"position":1},"title":"Calcutta High Court enhances compensation in motor accident claims case","author":"Ritu","date":"September 30, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Calcutta High Court deleted the name of one of the claimants who had passed away, and condoned the delay in filing the appeal.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":236320,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/09\/26\/kar-hc-applying-the-law-declared-by-sc-in-motor-vehicle-cases-court-enhances-compensation-amount-appeal-allowed\/","url_meta":{"origin":220963,"position":2},"title":"Kar HC | Applying the law declared by SC in Motor Vehicle cases, Court enhances compensation amount; Appeal allowed","author":"Editor","date":"September 26, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Karnataka High Court: A Division Bench of S. Sujatha, E.S. Indiresh, JJ., allow the appeal, increasing amount of compensation as granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. \u00a0Brief Facts The husband of the appellant \u2013 claimant, while proceeding towards Beltangadi to adduce evidence before JMF II Court, met with an\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":245845,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/20\/accident-case\/","url_meta":{"origin":220963,"position":3},"title":"Gau HC | Deceased being below 40 years of age the future prospects shall be held at 40%; HC allows appeal against enhanced compensation in motor accident case","author":"Editor","date":"March 20, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Gauhati High Court: Parthivjyoti Saikia, J., addressed the instant appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and award dated 30-08-2016 which had been filed for enhancement of award. The facts of the case were such that on 07-07-2013, one Bimal Kr. Saikia (the deceased)\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":286528,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/07\/appropriate-multiplier-for-deceased-aged-35-years-should-be-16-in-place-of-17-for-calculation-of-compensation-in-cases-under-motor-vehicles-act-1988-manipur-high-court-grants-around-rs-29-lakhs-as-com\/","url_meta":{"origin":220963,"position":4},"title":"Manipur High Court grants around Rs. 29 lakhs as compensation to the family of the deceased","author":"Simranjeet","date":"March 7, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Manipur High Court held that the appropriate multiplier for deceased, aged 35 years should be 16 in place of 17 for calculation of compensation in cases under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Manipur High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-633.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-633.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-633.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-633.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":201123,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/01\/lrs-of-deceased-cannot-maintain-claim-under-section-166-mv-act-if-accident-occurred-on-deceaseds-own-fault-or-rash-and-negligent-driving-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":220963,"position":5},"title":"LRs of deceased cannot maintain claim under Section 166 MV Act if accident occurred on deceased\u2019s own fault or rash and negligent driving: SC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 1, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The Bench of N.V. Ramana and S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ. allowed an appeal filed by the appellant (insurer) against the judgment and order of Tripura High Court whereby the insurer was directed to pay compensation to the respondents (legal representatives of the deceased) as awarded by the Motor\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220963","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=220963"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220963\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=220963"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=220963"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=220963"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}