Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

august 2007

Supreme Court of India · 2007-08-30

A.P.S.R.T.C. Rep. By Its Chief Law ... vs M. Pentaiah Chary

Citation / case number
AIR 2007 SUPREME COURT 3141
Court
Supreme Court of India
Petitioner
A.P.S.R.T.C. Rep. By Its Chief Law ...
Respondent
M. Pentaiah Chary
Author
S.B. Sinha
Bench
S.B. Sinha, Harjit Singh Bedi

Judgment text excerpt

The Supreme Court addressed the application of the multiplier method under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, determining that the High Court's application of a multiplier of '15' was appropriate given the claimant's age, earning capacity, and dependency of family members. The Court upheld the High Court's decision to grant additional compensation of Rs. 1,62,800/- to the claimant, emphasizing the need for a structured approach in calculating damages for loss of earning capacity due to permanent disability. The judgment reinforces the principles established in General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v. Susamma Thomas regarding the assessment of dependency and future earnings.

A.P.S.R.T.C. Rep. By Its Chief Law ... vs M. Pentaiah Chary · Niyam