Supreme Court of India Judgements

47270 Judgements hosted as on 26/06/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Accident

Accident

Motor Vehicle – Accident – Death – authoritative pronouncement of this Court in National Insurance Co Ltd v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, the claimants are entitled to an increase of 40% towards annual dependency on account of ‘future prospects’ given the undisputed age of the deceased – Non examination of witness -Courts should be only to analyze the material placed on record by the parties to ascertain whether the claimant’s version is more likely than not true. – Appeal allowed.

Dec 8, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  ANITA SHARMA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Surya Kant and Aniruddha…

Accident

Appellant was working as a typist/data entry operator in court premises in Delhi – High Court clearly erred in holding that compensation for loss of future prospects could not be awarded – High Court halved it to 45% on an entirely wrong application of some ‘proportionate’ principle (following the Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 860 principle), which was illogical and is unsupportable in law

Sep 19, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH PAPPU DEO YADAV — Appellant Vs. NARESH KUMAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, Krishna Murari and S. Ravindra…

Accident

Motor Accident Compensation] For Age Group 15-25, Multiplier To Be Applied Is ’18’HELD multiplier applied was 13 while as per the judgment in Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr.- (2009) 6 SCC 121, it should have been 18.(b) The interest granted is of 6% which generally the interest being granted is of 9%”

Aug 1, 2020 sclaw

Motor Accident Compensation] For Age Group 15-25, Multiplier To Be Applied Is ’18’, Reiterates SC   IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2831 of 2020…

You missed

Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 168 — Notional income of skilled worker — Carpenter — Assessment — The appellant, a carpenter aged 38 years, suffered amputation of his right leg below the knee in a road accident in November 2004 — The Claims Tribunal assessed his monthly income at Rs. 3,000/- and the High Court enhanced it to Rs. 5,000/- relying on minimum wages. Held — A carpenter is a skilled artisan who works with precision and manual dexterity — His income cannot be equated with that of an unskilled worker — Where the appellant’s unrefuted evidence showed earnings of Rs. 8,000/- to Rs. 10,000/- per month, and a skilled job always has the potentiality to fetch higher income, the High Court erred in restricting the figure to Rs. 5,000/- — Considering the date of accident, decisions in comparable cases and the fact of the appellant being a skilled worker, his notional monthly income is assessed at Rs. 9,000/- per month.

Jun 26, 2026 sclaw
Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 304 Part II — Culpable Homicide not Amounting to Murder — Conviction and sentence — Appeal against — Abatement of appeal due to death of co-accused — Death of two appellants during pendency of appeal — Appeal survives only for the third appellant.

Jun 26, 2026 sclaw
State Laws

Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 — Section 154 — Transfer of land in contravention of ceiling limit — Not void ipso facto — Capable of ratification — Legality of transfer to be judged by law on date of execution — Sale deed executed on 04.06.1957 — Ceiling limit then was 30 acres, subsequently amended to 12.5 acres retrospectively from 01.07.1952 — Transfer in contravention of Section 154 not void but voidable at instance of Gaon Sabha coupled with liability for ejectment of transferee under Section 163 — No suit filed for ejectment within limitation period.

Jun 24, 2026 sclaw
Specific Performance

Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 16(c) — “Readiness and Willingness” — Relief of specific performance is equitable and discretionary — Plaintiff must specifically aver and prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform obligations — Failure to do so disentitles plaintiff to relief — “Readiness” refers to financial capacity, “Willingness” to conduct and intention — Both cumulatively must be seen — Conduct of plaintiff prior and subsequent to suit, along with attending circumstances, must be considered — Availability of funds must be proved with reference to relevant time, not by documents created much later.

Jun 24, 2026 sclaw